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

[feature] Nucleo-H563ZI Board not recognized #1384

Open
Nightwalker-87 opened this issue Apr 6, 2024 Discussed in #1381 · 7 comments
Open

[feature] Nucleo-H563ZI Board not recognized #1384

Nightwalker-87 opened this issue Apr 6, 2024 Discussed in #1381 · 7 comments

Comments

@Nightwalker-87
Copy link
Member

Discussed in #1381

Originally posted by DF4OR March 26, 2024
Hi.
Beginner here.
I have sucessfully used other boards (e.g. Nucleo-F091RC) with the current st-link utils on Linux. The Nucleo-H563ZI board in contrast is not properly recognized and cannot be programmed.

Output of lsusb
Bus 003 Device 017: ID 0483:374e STMicroelectronics STLINK-V3

Output of st-info --probe

  version:    V3J10
  serial:     003A001B3132511138363431
  flash:      0 (pagesize: 0)
  sram:       0
  chipid:     0x000
  dev-type:   unknown

Outout of st-info --version
v1.8.0

System

  • Arch Linux, kernel 6.8.1-arch1-1
  • stlink utils installed with pacman

Any idea what's going on?

TIA,
Ekki

@Nightwalker-87 Nightwalker-87 added this to the Longlist milestone Apr 6, 2024
@Nightwalker-87 Nightwalker-87 changed the title STM32 Nucleo-H563ZI Board not recognized [feature] Nucleo-H563ZI Board not recognized Apr 7, 2024
@muxelplexer
Copy link

I'd be very much interested in helping on this issue as i've been trying to setup my Nucleo-H563ZI through stlink myself. Would you have any clues/guidance what is missing for this board for someone who hasn't been too involved with the codebase yet? @Nightwalker-87

As far as i've seen it should only be the flash that is not being picked up correctly? Or is it actually the Stlink-3VPWR that is throwing it off?

@Nightwalker-87
Copy link
Member Author

@muxelplexer Thanks for the feedback. However I'm not really sure, if I can give any useful advice here, as I am not aware of the technical specifics of this board and how they relate to certain parts in the code base. One should know that there are coexisting older and newer parts of the st-link library, which derive from different ways of implementation. This has not fully been resolved yet and I don't know if/how this affects this issue in any kind.

@antoinh
Copy link

antoinh commented Jun 26, 2024

I'm also interested on getting this to work with STM32H5 series. One of the quick thing I notice is that the stm32H5 requires connection on access port 1 instead of the traditional port 0 when using SWD. There might be some other changes but that is certainly a point to start with these new chips.

In ST-LINK utility or STCubeProgrammer there is such an option but I don't see this option in the open source stlink.

See this thread from ST where the ST employee mentions the connection via port1. I can also see that stm32cube programmer does the switch automatically to port1:

https://community.st.com/t5/stm32cubeide-mcus/unable-to-flash-nucleo-h563zi-with-stm32cubeide-v1-14/m-p/618423/highlight/true#M22695

image

@ypearson-bdai
Copy link

Any news here?

@tonyh1988
Copy link

No, sorry I don't have time to investigate this further at the moment. I just thought I would comment my findings to help someone that might want to dive deeper into this eventually or maybe even myself if I want to dive deeper on this later

@tonyh1988
Copy link

That being said the stm32cube programmer command line interface is freely available and should in theory work with STM32H5. I will need to investigate this further until the open source stlink driver catch up with these newer MCUs.

@Nightwalker-87
Copy link
Member Author

We are still waiting for any constructive input here...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Ready
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants