[avrdude-dev] [bug #34302] Feature request : device configuration with parent classes

[Rene Liebscher]

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #34302 (project avrdude):

There is still some work. 

For example for bug #21797 I tried to redefine only the flash memory. But this
ends in having two flash memory entries in the memory table.

         AVR Part                      : AT90PWM316
         Chip Erase delay              : 9000 us
         PAGEL                         : PD8
         BS2                           : PE2
         RESET disposition             : possible i/o
         RETRY pulse                   : SCK
         serial program mode           : yes
         parallel program mode         : yes
         Timeout                       : 200
         StabDelay                     : 100
         CmdexeDelay                   : 25
         SyncLoops                     : 32
         ByteDelay                     : 0
         PollIndex                     : 3
         PollValue                     : 0x53
         Memory Detail                 :

                                  Block Poll               Page               
       Polled
           Memory Type Mode Delay Size  Indx Paged  Size   Size #Pages MinW 
MaxW   ReadBack
           ----------- ---- ----- ----- ---- ------ ------ ---- ------ -----
----- ---------
           eeprom        65     6     4    0 no        512    4      0  4000 
4500 0xff 0xff
           flash         65     6    64    0 yes      8192   64    128  4500 
4500 0xff 0xff
           signature      0     0     0    0 no          3    0      0     0  
  0 0x00 0x00
           lock           0     0     0    0 no          1    0      0  9000 
9000 0x00 0x00
           lfuse          0     0     0    0 no          1    0      0  9000 
9000 0x00 0x00
           hfuse          0     0     0    0 no          1    0      0  9000 
9000 0x00 0x00
           efuse          0     0     0    0 no          1    0      0  9000 
9000 0x00 0x00
           calibration    0     0     0    0 no          1    0      0     0  
  0 0x00 0x00
           flash         33     6   128    0 yes     16384  128    128  4500 
4500 0xff 0xff


It is clear the new memory must replace the old one. But it must be defined if
this replaces the whole memory block (and you have repeat all settings for the
block) or if the original block is duplicated and new settings just overwrite
the old ones in the block.

I would prefer the first method as there are currently no means to delete
unwanted settings in a duplicated block (opcodes, ...) Also the repeating of
all settings would still work if later the second method is implemented.

Any comments?

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/bugs/?34302>

_______________________________________________
  Nachricht geschickt von/durch Savannah
  http://savannah.nongnu.org/