The functions set_using_xosc(), set_using_lposc(), set_using_gpio_1khz(), set_using_gpio_1hz() in \src\rp235x\powman\regs.rs do not make sense

[mschnell1]

The functions set_using_xosc(), set_using_lposc(), set_using_gpio_1khz(), set_using_gpio_1hz() in \src\rp235x\powman\regs.rs do not make sense
as the appropriate bits in the TIMER register are read only.

[mschnell1]

Moreover IMHO, the function set_alarm(&mut self, val: bool) should be called reset_alarm() and have no argument, as the appropriate bit in the TIMER register is "Clear on write 1".

[mschnell1]

BTW.: it would be nice if the "Register" functions would support the non consuming Builder Pattern .
such as:

TIMER.time()
  .read()
  .set_nonsec_write()
  .clear()
  .set_alarm_enab(false)
  .reset_alarm()
  .set_key()
  .write(TIMER.time())

With set_key() setting the upper 16 bits to 0x5afe

Seems like a non breaking change to me.

[Dirbaio]

the PAC is autogenerated by chiptool. It's not possible to do ad-hoc changes to individual registers like that, they all have to work the same way.

It's intentional that all fields are readable/writable. The "register value" structs are a copy of the register in memory. Think of it like a "u32 but with a nice wrapper to get/set all the fields".

Chiptool intentionally doesn't support "chaining" method calls like that because it results in less readable code.

[mschnell1]

Yep (it took me some trial and error but) I do understand the "nice wrapper" concept and it's perfectly OK.
I don't agree and think chaining and not seeing "dummy" and always "appropriately named" functions would be even nicer, but I do see your meaning.
(In fact my suggestion would need chiptool to read a configuration file with alternate conversions: maybe not actually viable)
Thanks for answering !

BTW.: Embassy is just GREAT !
BTW/2 Seemingly I am close to succeeding in doing a timer_driver version that allows to select (by features) if you want to use TIMER1,TIMER2, or the zero Power AON TIMER as the Embassy system timer.

[mschnell1]

Ahh, chiptool is part of the embasy-rp repository !
So I might come up with an issue suggesting enhancement over there....

[mschnell1]

I found that the Builder Pattern does not make as much sense, as I supposed, because the write function's target needs to be repeated, even if it's a constant: .write(TIMER.time()) .

It could be memorized from .read(), but that would impose some ambiguity.