search

devehe / stm32flash

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/stm32flash
1 stars 7 forks source link

Support STM32F0 devices #29

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Even though AN2606 doesn't list F0, the same data (except for the memory used 
by the bootloader) is obtainable from the datasheet.

With the attached patch it's possible to work with the device manually 
resetting it after each invocation (probably armv6-m vs armv7-m differences).

Original issue reported on code.google.com by fercer...@gmail.com on 5 Jul 2012 at 10:46

Attachments:

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
In absence of the maintainer, I have set up a git repository where I will try 
to incorporate all outstanding patches: 
https://gitorious.org/stm32flash/stm32flash#more

I applied your patch to the issue29 branch at 
https://gitorious.org/stm32flash/stm32flash/commits/issue29

Original comment by lists.to...@gmail.com on 17 Nov 2012 at 8:55

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Support for 0x440 is also added in the patch in 
http://code.google.com/p/stm32flash/issues/detail?id=34 but with slightly 
different parameters. Which ones are correct? Do you have a reference to a 
relevant ST document?

Original comment by lists.to...@gmail.com on 24 Nov 2012 at 1:35

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Hey Tormod!

I know you from your work on dfu-util, great to see you active with stm32flash 
too :)

Apparently neither variant is correct.

He got "Option bytes" area almost right (there're only 6 "bytes", meaning 12 
bytes, so it should be 1FFFF800 -- 1FFFF80C). "4 Option byte description" page 
59 RM0091 and 
p.39 (memory map).

System memory is correct in my variant (0x1FFFEC00 -- 0x1FFFF800), gives 3kB, 
see p.39 (memory map).

And yes, it does have 4 pages per sector, i have no idea why i wrote it the 
other way, p 42 is quite explicit about it.

To sum up, i think it should be like this:
{0x440, "STM32F051x", 0x20001000, 0x20002000, 0x08000000, 0x08010000,  4, 1024, 
0x1FFFF800, 0x1FFFF80C, 0x1FFFEC00, 0x1FFFF800}

All those values doesn't matter much as they're apparently used only for 
informational purposes atm.

Thank you again and happy hacking!

Original comment by fercer...@gmail.com on 24 Nov 2012 at 8:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Thanks for checking and explaining this! I added your info to the commit 
message.

Original comment by lists.to...@gmail.com on 24 Nov 2012 at 8:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
This has now been fixed in the official repository and is included in version 
0.3beta2.

Original comment by lists.to...@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2013 at 11:15