With RISC-V being a relatively young toolchain, a lot of inconsistencies
between different toolchains are to be found that differ in the target
triple and the flags supported. This build system performs run-time
tests to detect the toolchain and supported flags.
With `BUILD_IN_DOCKER=1` issues arise, as this checks are performed
outside of the docker container. However, the host may have no RISC-V
toolchain installed or a different toolchain, so there is little reason
in performing this detection then. Instead, a hard coded target triple
and supported flags are provided when using `BUILD_IN_DOCKER=1`.
This file is an excerpt of STM32 header file `stm32/smsis/f7/include/stm32f767xx.h` since the ESP32x SoCs use the same Synopsys DWC2 IP core as USB peripherals.
Since `esp_can.h` is included by main `cpu/esp32/include/periph_cpu.h` after the include of the specific `periph_cpu_$(CPU_FAM)`, it is not necessary to include `esp_can.h` in each specific `periph_cpu_$(CPU_FAM)`.
Makefiles don't do comments, so these were forwarded into the variable.
*Most* users would expand the arguments to a shell where it'd be
ignored, but not all of them.
Contributes-To: https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/pull/18489
(This is also where the one version that is added here was removed).
The board definition of the `nrf52dk` was likely created for some clone
board. However, an official board name nRF52 DK provided by Nordic
also exists. This resulted in previous contributors in confusing this
with the official board and "fixing" the board definition to match
the nRF52 DK board.
Or maybe it always has been meant to be the official board and someone
just added a wrong image to it.
In either case, this brings the documentation back in alignment with
the code by replacing references to some random clone board and the
image of the random clone board with those to/of the official Nordic
nRF52 DK board.
