Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Flash clock frequency changed for imxrt10xx boards. #427

Closed
robert-hh opened this issue Jan 27, 2025 · 3 comments
Closed

Flash clock frequency changed for imxrt10xx boards. #427

robert-hh opened this issue Jan 27, 2025 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@robert-hh
Copy link
Contributor

Operating System

Linux

INFO_UF2.TXT

TinyUF2 Bootloader 0.20.1-25-g46de518-dirty - tinyusb (0.16.0-1090-g3eea46056)
Model: NXP RT1020 EVK
Board-ID: MIMXRT1020-EVK-revA
Date: Jan 27 2025
Flash Size: 0x00800000 bytes

What happened ?

The bootloader changes the flash clock frequency for the imxrt10xx boards. For most boards it is lowered from 100Mhz to 60Mhz or 30MHz. For the Teensy it it raised from 100Mhz to 133Mhz. Is is possible either

  • not to lower the frequency? I made trial changes for 100Mhz and it still works.
  • set it only when flash writes are happen and not on every boot?
  • set it back?

The INFO.UF2.TXT is just a sample from one board. The issue applies to all imxrt10xx boards.

How to reproduce ?

Compare the flash clock frequencies before and after the flash configuration was changed in the bootloader.

Debug Log

No response

Screenshots

No response

@robert-hh robert-hh added the bug Something isn't working label Jan 27, 2025
@robert-hh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looking at the code of main.c it seems that the flash mode is re-configured only if the board is in DFU mode & the firmware image is to be uploaded. That would be option 2 about. But flash is slow even if the app is called.
Note: how do I get access to the LOG messages?

@hathach
Copy link
Member

hathach commented Feb 6, 2025

thanks, I think this is already fixed by #428. If so we could close this one ?

@robert-hh
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, it was merged by Scott. Can be closed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants