You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I recently noticed that PICO_FLASH_SPI_CLKDIV was not having any effect on my project ported to RP2350, whereas it worked fine with RP2040 before.
This reproduced when using the stock Pico 2 and Pimoroni Pico Plus 2 board files, which use the same boot2_w25q080.Sboot_stage2. It does get assembled.
The QMI timing values I am seeing on a MCVE (provided below) don't match my expectations reading the boot script.
When ripping out all the code from boot2_w25q080.S, behavior is unchanged! (Adding garbage to it, it fails to assemble, so it is still getting selected somewhere.)
The lower byte of timing should be 2 (the default CLKDIV), the rcmd is missing the upper byte that should have gotten configured, etc. -- so I am assuming it is inheriting whatever the bootrom had configured.
(EDIT: Writing to those regs works fine; I've been doing it.)
I observed this issue both selecting the 2.0.0 tag and the latest develop tip.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
asumagic
changed the title
RP2350: boot_stage2 broken? resulting in incorrect flash config
RP2350: boot_stage2 never run? resulting in incorrect flash config
Sep 4, 2024
I recently noticed that
PICO_FLASH_SPI_CLKDIV
was not having any effect on my project ported to RP2350, whereas it worked fine with RP2040 before.This reproduced when using the stock Pico 2 and Pimoroni Pico Plus 2 board files, which use the same
boot2_w25q080.S
boot_stage2
. It does get assembled.The QMI timing values I am seeing on a MCVE (provided below) don't match my expectations reading the boot script.
When ripping out all the code from
boot2_w25q080.S
, behavior is unchanged! (Adding garbage to it, it fails to assemble, so it is still getting selected somewhere.)The lower byte of
timing
should be2
(the default CLKDIV), thercmd
is missing the upper byte that should have gotten configured, etc. -- so I am assuming it is inheriting whatever the bootrom had configured.(EDIT: Writing to those regs works fine; I've been doing it.)
I observed this issue both selecting the
2.0.0
tag and the latestdevelop
tip.Repro:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: