Open-CMSIS-PackOpen-CMSIS-Pack Technical Meeting 2022-06-28

Open-CMSIS-Pack Technical Meeting 2022-06-28


Joachim Krech
Luís Tonicha
Daniel Brondani
Jaeden Amero
Eric Finco (ST)
Frédéric Ruellé
Bill Fletcher
David Jurajda
Jonatan Antoni
Holt Sun
Kyle Dando




Meeting Notes

Specification Change Board Review


JK: Laurent asked the question why license could be associated with API definition. The API could be associated with a different license.

FR: PKCS#11 is an example - the API has one license but your implementation can have another.

EF: So can keep this independent?

JK: Yes.


JK: Agree - should we decouple the board extension vs general extensions?

FR: Maybe a specific need - why would a software component depend on a board

JK: Board could maybe have certain flash or hardware module - in csolution may want to associate a specific layer with a specific board. What was the usecase that triggered this?

HS: Have a component/flash/external chips that are board specific - so we have a software component only applicable to the board

EF: It’s the board or the part/component on the board?

HS: Specific for the board.


JK: Wanted to have more details on this.

DJ: Understood it might be an optional parameter.

JK: Set this for review?


FR: Think we need one source of information - if we go for pdsc then we get rid or rzone. There is a duplicate of information.

JK: Ok to keep open for another week?

EF/FR: Yes


JK: Would be good for people to review - so we can have changelog files associated with components on top of the release notes file


FR: Interest also from ST’s side. Happy to discuss with NXP colleagues.

JK: Helpful if you can self-organise. Anyone else interested - please leave a comment in the issue if you want to be involved.


JK: Should we take this to the review?

EF: Yes … can also look internally to see if we are able to share more proposals.

Add <csolution> element to *.PDSC format

JK: Have example in GitHub - a TF-M build

HS: Don’t know how tools will deal with this information.

JK: Don’t have an immediate answer how it would be represented in IDE. Will take it back as an action to visualise a potential way.


#179 discussion

Meeting Recording