Neundorf, Alexander wrote: > Hi, > > in the Intel 28fxxx flash driver there is a timeout used, and this > timeout is specified as a simple loop which is executed 5000000 > times. Now we have a fast processor and a slow flash, so for us this > timeout isn't big enough. We could simply increase the count, but > this still depends on flash and processor speed.
I'd have suggested putting HAL_DELAY_US() macro calls in the loop. That would give you a lower bound on the timeout. However, I think it it has the same problem as HAL_CLOCK_READ() below. How about sticking a few more functions (like hal_delay_us) in .2ram ? > Ideally we'd like to use HAL_CLOCK_READ() to measure the time, but > this isn't possible since hal_clock_read() is located in the section > .text which is in the flash, but flash_program_buf() is located in > the section .data which is located in RAM. When calling > hal_clock_read() the linker complains and more importantly it won't > work since the flash is busy while it is being programmed. David Vrabel -- David Vrabel, Design Engineer Arcom, Clifton Road Tel: +44 (0)1223 411200 ext. 3233 Cambridge CB1 7EA, UK Web: http://www.arcom.com/ -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
