PSoC™ 4 Forum Discussions

Hello everyone,

I am using cypress chip CYBL10162-56LQXI with another processor. Whenever I want to update my application (bootloadable), I get the image from the other processor and I am writing those bytes from the bootloader at address 0x7000 to 0x1FFF0 in the flash memory, using uint32 CySysFlashWriteRow(uint32 rowNum, const uint8 rowData[]). But this takes more than 2 minutes. Is there anyway we can make this thing work faster?

Thank you.

I seem to be getting some incorrect data back from the PSOC when sending the Get Flash Size Command. In my .cyacd file its clear that the first row of data has the a row ID of 0x50 (80), but after calling the Get Flash Size Command the PSoC returns a valid row rand of 0x51(81) to 0xFF.

Does anyone have any ideas about this? Why would the row numbers be different? I'm just reprogramming the same .cyacd file to test this.

I'm using the API from AN86526.

I'm looking into using Die Temperaturep [v1.0] block on a PSOC 4 CY8C4245PVS-482.

This is an extended temp PSOC 4 that I'm using for a high temp application. When I open the data sheet for this block I notice the first thing it says in the Features section is "Valid operating range from -40 degrees C to +85 degrees C".

I'm wondering if this documentation is incorrect or if the software/hardware limits the internal measuring range of the die temp measurement to max of +85 degrees C.

The data sheet of the the CY8C4245PVS-482 says the max operating temp of the junction for that micro is +105 degrees C.

I would expect the Die Temperature feature to measure up to that +105 degrees C temp and not saturate at +85 degrees C. I'm going to test this out as soon as my board arrives from our contract manufacturer.

I just want to check with Cypress that any temp readings above +85 degrees C will be in spec of the parts reading capabilities for that function of the PSOC.

I've attached a screen shot of the data sheet I'm referring to.

Thanks,

Kyle

I'm trying to upgrade my KitProg to the newest version. I'm using the PSoC programmer, clicking upgrade firmware, unplugging then replugging. It goes through the upgrade and reports a success, but then reports the same firmware version. Has anyone had this issue? I attached the programmer output. 

I've got a project which includes separate OTA bootloader (Fixed Stack) and bootloadable / application code. I'm trying to implement some mechanism such that the application code can know the version of the bootloader code that's on the device.

Inside the OTA bootloader code, I've added the following code

In main.h

#define FIRMWARE_VERSION_MAJOR              0x00
#define FIRMWARE_VERSION_MINOR              0x01
#define FIRMWARE_VERSION_BUILD              0x02

typedef struct
{
    uint8         major;
    uint8         minor;
    uint8       build;

}BTL_FIRMWARE_VERSION;

In main.c

BTL_FIRMWARE_VERSION GetBootloaderVersion(void)
{
    BTL_FIRMWARE_VERSION bootloader_firmware;
    
    bootloader_firmware.major = FIRMWARE_VERSION_MAJOR;
    bootloader_firmware.minor = FIRMWARE_VERSION_MINOR;
    bootloader_firmware.build = FIRMWARE_VERSION_BUILD;
    
    return bootloader_firmware;
}

And then I've updated the linker file (cm0gcc.ld) to include the following two lines:

KEEP(*(i.GetBootloaderVersion*))

KEEP(*(.text.GetBootloaderVersion*))

After making those updates, I've compiled the bootloader project and run the mk.bat script without any problems/errors/warnings. Then I've updated my application code to include the following:

In the header file:

typedef struct
{
    uint8         major;
    uint8         minor;
    uint8       build;

}BTL_FIRMWARE_VERSION;

extern BTL_FIRMWARE_VERSION GetBootloaderVersion(void);

In the .c file

BTL_FIRMWARE_VERSION bootloader_firmware = GetBootloaderVersion();

However, when I compile the application code, I get an error on the line above in my .c file which states "Build error: undefined reference to 'GetBootloaderVersion'.

This leads me to believe that I am doing something wrong with the linker script and the function is getting optimized out of the bootloader, but I'm not sure what else I should try, as I'm having NO problem sharing all the relevant BLE stack functions between the bootloader and the application with the linker script in the same fashion.

Any insight or suggestions on how I can easily achieve this would be greatly appreciated! Thanks in advance!