Firmware Upgrade Via USART

[mvi]

Posted on August 18, 2008 at 09:33

Firmware Upgrade Via USART

[mvi]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Hi,

Im interested in knowing whether its possible to perform firmware upgrades via the USART. Has anyone tried it? Any directional help is appreciated.

Thanks.

-Mad D

[16-32micros]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Hi mvi,

Check :

http://www.st.com/stonline/products/literature/an/13588.pdf

: STM32F10xxx in-application programming using the USART .

Enjoy using it. Cheers,

STOne-32.

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

[16-32micros]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Hi ST7,

keep cool, I will test it in my boards and let you back what is going there. However, when I posted my message by 22-04-2008 at that time the Application note is handling only one device family ( medium density) and the software is working fine :|

I will let you know soon,

Cheers,

STOne-32.

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Quote:

Check :

http://www.st.com/stonline/products/literature/an/13588.pdf

: STM32F10xxx in-application programming using the USART .

Enjoy using it. Cheers,

I'm not emjoying it at all - it's making me very frustrated!! :|

The PDF document says,

Quote:

To specify the device (High-density or Medium-density) on which the software is to be run, uncomment the relative definition line in the platform_config.h header file:

//#define USE_STM3210B_EVAL

//#define USE_STM3210E_EVAL

but that's rubbish - because the relevant secion of platform_config.h is actually:

Quote:

#if !defined (USE_STM3210B_EVAL) && !defined (USE_STM3210E_EVAL)

//#define USE_STM3210B_EVAL

#define USE_STM3210E_EVAL

#endif

(I would use the 'CODE' tags there, but that seems to be what breaks my post!)

So any commenting or un-commenting of those lines will be completely ignored if either (or both) of the symbols is defined in the project - which, of course, they are!! :| :|

The project builds cleanly immediately after downloading it from the ST site, but if the USE_STM3210E_EVAL definition in the project is changed, the build fails - saying it can't find stm32f10x_conf.h :| :| :|

Even if the project is then restored to exactly as it was from the site, it will not rebuild again - it continues to say that it can't find stm32f10x_conf.h :| :| :| :|

If it managed to find it the first time, why can't it find it again?? :| :| :| :| :|

Leaving the definitions alone and changing the Target processor has a similar effect! :| :| :| :| :| :|

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

What's the matter with this forum - why are my posts disappearing?? :|

[ This message was edited by: st7 on 14-08-2008 16:32 ]

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

The PDF documents (and readme file) state the requirement that the ''user'' application must start at 0x0800_2000.

I assume that the example projects supplied must do this, but there is no description of how it is done - which is not very helpful when it comes to creating my own application!

Can you explain precisely what is needed to do this with RIDE7 ?

Thanks.

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Quote:

The project builds cleanly immediately after downloading it from the ST site, but if the USE_STM3210E_EVAL definition in the project is changed, the build fails - saying it can't find stm32f10x_conf.h

Found the cause of that - it's a Raisonance idiocy:

After changing the Project properties, you have to manually save the project (or close & re-open RIDE) before doing a build - otherwise it uses the wrong include path!! :| :|

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Quote:

it's a Raisonance idiocy:

After changing the Project properties, you have to manually save the project (or close & re-open RIDE) before doing a build - otherwise it uses the wrong include path!! :| :|

UPDATE: Raisonance think this problem may be to do with opening a project created with an earlier version of RIDE...

[st3]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:31

Quote:

I'm not expert of Ride 8-) toolchain,

So who created the RIDE projects in the download for this App Note?

I think they need to correct it - I think it's wrong!

Raisonance also need to fix their IDE!