The table spec for .svd cluster sections have a tag called <name>.
https://siliconlabs.github.io/Gecko_SDK_Doc/CMSIS/SVD/html/group__cluster_level__gr.html
.svd files from Atmel/Microchip omit [%s] in the <name> tag. The file has
<registers> <cluster> <dim>3</dim> <dimIncrement>64</dimIncrement> <name>TC_CHANNEL</name> <description>Channel Control Register (channel = 0)</description> <addressOffset>0x0</addressOffset> <register> <name>TC_CCR</name> <description>Channel Control Register (channel = 0)</description> <addressOffset>0x00</addressOffset> <size>32</size>
Instead, I was expecting -
<registers> <cluster> <dim>3</dim> <dimIncrement>64</dimIncrement> <name>TC_CHANNEL[%s]</name> <description>Channel Control Register (channel = 0)</description> <addressOffset>0x0</addressOffset> <register> <name>TC_CCR</name> <description>Channel Control Register (channel = 0)</description> <addressOffset>0x00</addressOffset> <size>32</size>
Is the Atmel file correct to omit [%s]? It would seem the rule in the table for a <name> which is "register names are required to be unique within the scope of a peripheral" is violated when [%s] is omitted. Would there not be duplicate TC_CHANNEL for each cluster when [%s] is omitted? When [%s] is included, would the names be TC_CHANNEL 0, TC_CHANNEL 1, TC_CHANNEL 2 which seems correct?
Are there any thoughts on why .svd files for Atmel parts are missing [%s] in the <name> tag?
Microchips responded to the topic - "It seems there is a bug regarding the issue which was already raised internally. It may be resolved in future updates."