STM32_gen_PeripheralPins.py takes wrong GPIO file

[SDziamchuk]

Description of defect

I try to create STM32H743IITx platform using this guide: https://os.mbed.com/teams/ST/wiki/steps-to-create-a-new-STM32-platform
But script STM32_gen_PeripheralPins.py always use GPIO-STM32H747_gpio_v1_0_Modes.xml file instead of GPIO-STM32H743_gpio_v1_0_Modes.xml

Log:

python STM32_gen_PeripheralPins.py -m "STM32H743IITx.xml"

Script version 1.12
CubeMX DB version DB.6.0.0

 * Output directory: C:\Users\sdziamchuk\.platformio\packages\framework-mbed\tools\targets\targets_custom\TARGET_STM\TARGET_STM32H743IITx
 * Generating PeripheralPins.c and PinNames.h with 'C:\Program Files\STMicroelectronics\STM32Cube\STM32CubeMX\db\mcu\STM32H743IITx.xml'
 * GPIO file: C:\Program Files\STMicroelectronics\STM32Cube\STM32CubeMX\db\mcu\IP\GPIO-STM32H747_gpio_v1_0_Modes.xml
 * I/O pins found: 248 connected: 0

Target(s) affected by this defect ?

STM32H743IITx

Toolchain(s) (name and version) displaying this defect ?

n/a

What version of Mbed-os are you using (tag or sha) ?

mbed-os-6.2.0

What version(s) of tools are you using. List all that apply (E.g. mbed-cli)

STM32_gen_PeripheralPins.py v1.12
CubeMX DB version DB.6.0.0
PlatformIO 5.0.1 (plaform: ST STM32 v8.1.0)

How is this defect reproduced ?

run
python STM32_gen_PeripheralPins.py -m "STM32H743IITx.xml"

[jeromecoutant]

Well
GPIO_modes file choice came from MCU xml file.
Before opening an internal ticket for CubeMX team, I checked GPIO-STM32H743_gpio_v1_0_Modes.xml, and quickly patched the script in order to use it.

Problem is that results seem not correct...

So I came to the conclusion that:

• file is OK to use
• issue is "only" the file name which should be GPIO-STM32H7_gpio_v1_0_Modes.xml file

[edit] After more tests, some bug in the script are detected.
Analysis still on going

[jeromecoutant]

As #13655 was still in review state, I added a patch :-)

[ciarmcom]

@SDziamchuk thank you for raising this issue.Please take a look at the following comments:

What toolchain(s) are you using?
How can we reproduce your issue?

NOTE: If there are fields which are not applicable then please just add 'n/a' or 'None'.This indicates to us that at least all the fields have been considered.
Please update the issue header with the missing information, the issue will not be mirroredto our internal defect tracking system or investigated until this has been fully resolved.

[ciarmcom]

Thank you for raising this detailed GitHub issue. I am now notifying our internal issue triagers.
Internal Jira reference: https://jira.arm.com/browse/IOTOSM-2459