• State Verified Answer
  • +1 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Replies 8 replies
  • Subscribers 75 subscribers
  • Views 2374 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Attachments (0)
Nordic Case Info
  • Case ID: 242414
Options
This post is older than 2 years and might not be relevant anymore
More Info: Consider searching for newer posts

JLink Firmware for nrf52840DK Shows Board as nrf52DK

roasted_duck

I am currently developing on the nrf52840DK (Rev 1.1.1) using the mbed os.

To debug on the board using OpenOCD it is necessary to flash the JLink firmware for the board. This leads to a problem with mbed os, as the board is now shown as "NRF52_DK" when calling "mbed detect". Resulting in the problem, that some code cannot be properly compiled by mbed os, as the nrf52840DK has some additional flags for features that are not available on the nrf52DK, such as the complete CryptoCell 310 support.

Best regards

  • 0 in reply to Håkon Alseth

    The problem is not the flashing per se, but 'mbed os' saying: "We compiled it for the NRF52840_DK, but we only found a NRF52_DK. We do not want to break anything, so we are not flashing your program."

    I think we are going in two different directions. I actually wanted to use this post as kind of a bug report. The thing is:

    - I want to use the mbed os cli

    - I want it to be recognised by 'mbed detect' as NRF52840_DK

    - I would like to use JLink firmware

    - I would like to avoid any further tooling, such as nrfjprog

    If you say: "Yeah, not possible. We build a generic firmware for all nrf52xx platform, and this intentionally led to mbed os detecting them as nrf52DK." It is fine. It makes my work a bit harder, but I can work around it. Then I need to find a way to modify my setup so I can keep things automated.

  • 0 in reply to roasted_duck

    If mbed overrides your wanted settings, I'd recommend asking on the mbed forums about this. It sounds like a issue on the mbed side, if this is a warning/issue through their systems.

  • +1 in reply to Håkon Alseth

    I debugged through the code, long story short:

    Depending on the firmware producer a different kind of product id is used. I close this.

    Edit: I do not know why it did not show up in my google search till now, but apparently someone already had the same problem, and reported it to the mbed os device (issue link). They have a workaround, but it does not solve the base problem, which is the firmware apparently.

Related
Terms of service