Talk:ARM Cortex-M

Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Debug and Trace

ARM Cortex-M supports various debug and trace methods like JTAG, SWD and SWV (ETM, micro ETM, instrumentation trace) etc.. We can add a section about this. The JTAG page does not describe these in detail. Viswesr (talk) 07:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's on my To Do list. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 02:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Smallest ARM

Not sure where to fit this in, but the fact that the Kinetis KL02 is the world’s smallest ARM chip at 1.9 by 2.0 by 0.5 millimeters seems notable:
http://www.wired.com/design/2013/02/freescales-tiny-arm-chip/
cache.freescale.com/files/microcontrollers/doc/fact_sheet/KINETISKL02CSPFS.pdf
http://cache.freescale.com/files/analog/doc/app_note/AN3846.pdf
--Guy Macon (talk) 01:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed the same announcement. It is a little bit smaller than the 2.17mm x 2.32mm NXP ARM chip NXP_LPC#LPC1100 Miniature that has been out for quite a while. I think the NXP was the smallest up to this point, but I'm not 100% sure. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 09:39, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, this is the press release. http://investors.freescale.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=175261&p=irol-newsArticle_print&ID=1789228&highlight=

Capitalization

Apparently the company styles itself "Arm" since 2017 or so. Independent sources overwhelmingly refer to the Cortex-M as "ARM Cortex-M", and its introduction predates the company name change. I have thus reverted the capitalization changes in this article. There may be a few instances where we refer to the company itself and can consider adapting the capitalization without creating anachronisms, but a blanket change is unhelpful. Huon (talk) 21:31, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, Wikipedia does not consider "branding" relevant for article content and does not create anachronisms, referring to technology in a way that is historically inaccurate. Huon (talk) 19:25, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ARM vs Arm

Rnell2020, in [1], changed all instances of ARM to Arm. This, being a major change, I thought required some discussion before being put in place. If Rnell2020 would like to explain, I ask that they do. --—moonythedwarf (Braden N.) 14:32, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was previously discussed 2.5 years ago at Talk:Arm_Holdings#ARM_vs_Arm_vs_arm Arm_Holdings. The ARM name for cores and microarchitecture has been used for decades, so just because Arm Holdings gets a wild hair to change it, it doesn't mean the entire world must go change it. YES for changing company name in articles to mixed case. NO for changing everything else. If people disagree, then bring it up again over in the Arm Holdings article. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 03:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

core / cores .vs. MCU / chip / microprocessor / whatever

The word "core" globally refers to a single processing unit, with most big chips these hays have many cores on the silicon die (e.g. a 7702 has 64 cores, and ESP32 has 2 cores, etc). The "Cortex" brand appears to have fried most brains, causing the word "core" to be used all over the place in this article in the wrong context... Somebody needs to fix that - "M4 cores" is just a single M4 processor - it is not "4 cores" or anything else confusingly related to the number of cores these thing all have (which is just one).

The article doesn't claim nor imply that "M4" means 4 cores. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]