Open-CMSIS-PackOpen-CMSIS-Pack Technical Meeting 2022-07-05

Open-CMSIS-Pack Technical Meeting 2022-07-05


Jonatan Antoni

Joachim Krech

Bill Fletcher

Daniel Brondani

Eric Finco

Luís Tonicha

Maxime Dortel

Vincent Grenet


Holt Sun

Kyle Dando

Charles Oliveira





Meeting Notes

Actions review

  • Decision committee

  • ST/NXP to re-discuss #112

  • Tools representations #134

  • Example for cdefault.yml file #356

Add <csolution> element to *.PDSC format #134

HS: files are read only?

JK: No, copied into the directory and a starting point for further modification. They are not the the same as components.

EF: Not sure I see the advantage to add to a clayer

JK: If you have agreed layers and layer interfaces, in order to collaborate - provide groups of configured components across projects.

EF: Why the idea to use csolution in the PDSC?

JK: Originally had clayers, cimage, cproject, but was trying to create semantics for a solution

EF: Seems to be a bit recursive. See the benefit as a concept.


JK: Resources should be captured in a separate ‘rzone’ file (#7). Do we specify this as a board description?

EF: We will probably withdraw proposal #120 since it is only a partial solution.

KD: Believe this should go for review.


EF: Don’t see a big issue here with introducing more changelog flexibility


JK: If no significant pushback would like to send this to review next week.

EF: Aligned with our direction.

VG: Also this field is optional.


JK: Samuel made some detailed notes about what is stored in the file and how it’s taken into account by tools. Think this is a useful refresh of the topic but it needs review.


VG: we want a unique place to list all the projects that are part of the csolution, even if they are not CMSIS compliant. Can still parse those projects to find the binaries. If the build manager is able to manage non-CMSIS projects then it’s ok.

HS: Don’t see a requirement for this at the time being.


JK: Suggesting to add a ‘disable’ flag so no RTE is created. Would like people to take a look so we can consider it for implementation or not.

Update on #314 (shorter file/pathnames)

VG: Can commit to look at the PR this week.

cpackget update

CO: Been looking at the possible scenarios. If installing a pack that has a dependency installed by a PDSC file should we consider than a dependency or not.


EF: Is there a busy agenda next week? Thinking to share some work done on ST’s side in describing additional components on a board.

Meeting Recording