Added LPC1114 in the official release list
fs: Silence GCC signed/unsigned warnings

The SDFileSystem class contained a few routines which compared a signed
integer loop index to an unsigned integer length/size.  I switched the
loop index to be uint32_t as well.
Merge pull request #39 from adamgreen/fsGccWarnSilence

fs: Silence GCC signed/unsigned warnings
Fixed error handling and cleanup
Support LPC1114 platform

Added TARGET_LPC1114 pins for InterruptIn test case and changed to
PullUp mode.
Fixed gpio_irq_api bugs

Corrected improper implementation of channel_ids[] usage.
Revemod redundant arrays e.g. pin_names[] and trigger_events[]
Merge pull request #40 from ytsuboi/master

Fixed error handling and cleanup
[LPC1114] fixed to use IRC and System PLL clock
Merge pull request #41 from ytsuboi/master

[LPC1114] fixed to use IRC and System PLL clock
USBDevice: Silence GCC warning

The following line in USBHAL_KL25Z.cpp would generate a warning in GCC
because of a potential operator precendence issue:
    return((USB0->FRMNUML | (USB0->FRMNUMH << 8) & 0x07FF));

This would have been interpreted as:
    return((USB0->FRMNUML | ((USB0->FRMNUMH << 8) & 0x07FF)));
since & has higher precedence than |

I switched it to be:
    return((USB0->FRMNUML | (USB0->FRMNUMH << 8)) & 0x07FF);
Since it makes more sense to & with 0x7FF after having merged the lower
and upper bytes together rather than just the upper byte.  It should
have resulted in the same value either way.
Merge pull request #42 from adamgreen/usbdeviceGccWarnSilence

USBDevice: Silence GCC warning
Updates to GCC warning level flags

In gcc4mbed, I have been running with "-Wall -Wextra" and then
disabling a couple of noisy warnings that result.  In particular, I
disable the unused-parameter and missing-field-initializers warnings.
The first commonly goes off for implementation of virtual methods or
other overridable functions where not all parameters are required for
every override.  I don't find the second warning to be all that useful
anyway since missing structure field initializers will be set to 0
according to the C language specification.  The RTOS code uses this
language feature and I see no reason that it shouldn't :)
Merge pull request #43 from adamgreen/gccWarnFlagUpdate

Updates to GCC warning level flags
[LPC1114] fixed simple bugs on export templates
[LPC810] add LPC810 support
[LPC810] fixed scatter file
Added support for LPC11U24_301/401 compilation with ARM toolchain
Added support for LPC11U35_401 in ARM and GCC_ARM
Added support for LPC11U24/_301 and LPC11U35_401 in uARM
net: Fully disable LWIP_ASSERTs

I was doing some debugging that had me looking at the disassembly of
lpc_rx_queue() from within the debugger.  I was looking for the call to
pbuf_alloc() that we see in the following code snippet:
		p = pbuf_alloc(PBUF_RAW, (u16_t) EMAC_ETH_MAX_FLEN, PBUF_RAM);
		if (p == NULL) {
			LWIP_DEBUGF(UDP_LPC_EMAC | LWIP_DBG_TRACE,
				("lpc_rx_queue: could not allocate RX pbuf (free desc=%d)\n",
				lpc_enetif->rx_free_descs));
			return queued;
		}

		/* pbufs allocated from the RAM pool should be non-chained. */
		LWIP_ASSERT("lpc_rx_queue: pbuf is not contiguous (chained)",
			pbuf_clen(p) <= 1);

When I was looking through the disassembly for this code I noticed a
call to pbuf_clen() in the actual machine code.
=> 0x0000bab0 <+24>:	bl	0x44c0 <pbuf_clen>
   0x0000bab4 <+28>:	ldr	r3, [r4, #112]	; 0x70
   0x0000bab6 <+30>:	ldrh.w	r12, [r5, #10]
   0x0000baba <+34>:	add.w	r2, r3, #9
   0x0000babe <+38>:	add.w	r0, r12, #4294967295	; 0xffffffff

The only call to pbuf_clean made from this function is made from
within the LWIP_ASSERT.  When I looked more closely at how this macro
was defined, I saw that the mbed version of the stack had disabled the
LWIP_PLATFORM_ASSERT macro when LWIP_DEBUG was false which means that
no action will be taken if the assert is false but it still allows the
LWIP_ASSERT macro to potentially evaluate the assert expression.
Defining the LWIP_NOASSERT macro will fully disable the LWIP_ASSERT
macro.

I saw one of my TCP/IP samples shrink about 0.5K when I made this
change.