cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

STM32Programmer V2.16.0 Missing BOOT bits in Option Bytes

bm2
Associate III

Hello,

I will configure the boot mode in the option bytes of the STM32G030F6. Now I see only the nBOOT1. I missing the nBOOT_SEL and nBOOT0.

bm2_0-1718176354405.png

In the refernce manual are describe all:

bm2_1-1718176427320.png

How can I cinfigure it?

And after the programming I will reload the option bytes with setting of the OP_LAUNCH flag. Can I do it with the STM32Programmer and how?

Thanks for our help,

Bernd

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
bm2
Associate III

Oh, I've vorgot my function in the application. I must remove it, it overwrite this.

Not it works fine :)

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4
bm2
Associate III

sorry @ all

I've found out that the programmer use the false device:

bm2_0-1718177722329.png

I've use a NUCLEO--L073RZ and connect the ST-Link to my hardware with a STM32G030. Can I change the device configuration?

STM32CubeProg recognises which target is connected to it via the ST-LINK.

Are you sure you have removed the two jumpers on CN2 so that the STM32L073 is no longer connected to the ST-LINK?

Regards
/Peter

In order to give better visibility on the answered topics, please click on Accept as Solution on the reply which solved your issue or answered your question.
bm2
Associate III

Thanks Peter Bensch,

that was the problem. I have removed the SB12..15 but this two line not. So now I have the correct device and see the correct boot mode flags.

I've set this in my software to nBOOT_SEL=0, nBOOT0=1 and nBOOT1=1. Now I see this in the programmer.

Now I will change the nBOOT_SEL to 1. After press "Applay" I become a error message:

bm2_0-1718181632435.pngbm2_1-1718181686481.png

And it is not changed. After press "Read" it show for me correct but after a POR it is not changed.

What must I do that work this correct?

Best regards,

Bernd

bm2
Associate III

Oh, I've vorgot my function in the application. I must remove it, it overwrite this.

Not it works fine :)