Thanks Robert,
you are right. The flash maybe destroyed by the 3.3v. Now I give the
chip a 1.8v power and let it run at 1.8v. This time I can upload the
firmware to the part. Though the message "Code in HEX file exceeds
Flash Limitations!" still pops up, I think the firmware is uploaded
into the chip. because I passed the Flash Compare, even I turned off
the power and then on again. So I guess it do be uploaded.
Thus, I may begin to fine the firmware. But I don't know if my
firmware executes.
Do you have some start code the simpler the better that only sent a
string to UART0. this way I can know that the firmware is running.
Best Regards.
richard
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...>
wrote:
> At 02:28 AM 3/27/04 +0000, you wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I made a lpc2105 test board. I tied vdd3.3 and v1.8 together and
> >provide a 3.3v power suply.
>
> You're running the core at 3.3V? I did that once by accident and
was
> impressed that the chip still ran. I didn't trust after that of
course.
>
> If you are running the core at 3.3V you may no longer have any
working
> flash once you attempted to program it (even if it does survive
running for
> a period of time).
>
> >Now I can read the part ID and bootloader
> >ID. I think it works. But, when I upload a program, I always get
the
> >message "Code in HEX file exceeds Flash Limitations!" however, the
>
> I don't know where that message is coming from unless hex file you
are
> loading isn't doing what you think it is. Maybe it's located to an
invalid
> address?
>
> >ISP Utility still displays an uploading progress bar and then gives
> >the successful completion notice. Indeed, nothing is uploaded to
the
> >chip. The Philips's LPC210X ISP Utility version is 1.0.2 and the
> >power Voltage is stable during uploading. The firmware program is
got
> >from this group and its created HEX file is only 6k(433Bytes after
> >loaded into ISP Utility).
>
> What do you mean by "433 bytes after loaded into ISP Utility" ?
>
> >I compiled it with keil mVision 2. I
> >changed the definition ".equ RAM_Limit, 0x40010000" to ".equ
> >RAM_Limit, 0x0006000" hoping to reduce the maybe RAM limitation.
But
> >it doesn't work.
>
> This certainly won't help. From the looks of that, the equate is
an
> absolute address and if that's the case the redefinition isn't in
the
> address space of any of the micro's memory.
>
> >Anybody knows where is the Limitation?
> >the Crystal is 11.0592MHz and Baudrate is 19200
>
> It would effect the flash programming timing if you didn't enter
the
> crystal frequency in the ISP SW.
>
> Robert
>
> " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always
restrictions,
> be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try
to
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> chew a radio signal. "
>
> Kelvin Throop, III