Migrating/Porting from SDK8 & S110 to SDK12 & S130

RE: Migrating/Porting from SDK8 & S110 to SDK12 & S130

bjorn-spockeli — Tue, 25 Oct 2016 08:44:29 GMT

Happy to help :) I would appreciate of you could mark the answer as correct/accepted by clicking the checkmark in the circle to the left of the answer.

RE: Migrating/Porting from SDK8 & S110 to SDK12 & S130

Aravinth — Fri, 21 Oct 2016 14:44:43 GMT

thank you for pointing it out that there is a change in bootloader size. So we will not be migrating because we also have some pages below bootloader settings to persist our custom settings. Probably we migrate the SDK since we face issues with TWI driver as it locks up. All our peripherals (6 Sensors) are using i2c. I'll let you know if there is anything. Thanks once again.

RE: Migrating/Porting from SDK8 & S110 to SDK12 & S130

bjorn-spockeli — Tue, 18 Oct 2016 13:51:36 GMT

Hi Aravinth,

if the features of the S130 and the new SDK is something that improves your product, then yes, I would recommend migrating.

As you correctly stated, we introduced a new secure bootloader in SDK v12.0.0 which allow you to sign the firmware images. However, this bootloader is considerably larger[~24kB) compared to the legacy bootloader(~15kB), which means that it is not possible to update from the legacy to the secure bootloader unless the size bootloader region was initially set to 24kB. This is becaue the bootloader address that is stored in a UICR register cannot be rewritten without erasing the entire device. Additionally, the Secure Bootloader does not currently support bond sharing or buttonless DFU( only experimental).

Thus, I would recommend porting the legacy bootloader to SDK v12.0.0 and implement bond sharing using the Peer Manager instead of the Device Manager in the application, please see the attached example.

Attachments: nRF5_SDK_11.0.0_dfu_with_pm_310316.zip

Best regards

Bjørn

RE: Migrating/Porting from SDK8 & S110 to SDK12 & S130

Francois — Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:15:47 GMT

Also very interested to know :-)