nRF52832 Errata 220 clearification, need more information

RE: nRF52832 Errata 220 clearification, need more information

dr71 — Tue, 03 Mar 2020 12:31:36 GMT

Hi Susheel,

is this thread still open or is it closed and I have to open e new one?

The reason is that another related question came up.
The function sd_app_evt_wait() is implemented in the Softdevice. Therefore I assume that the SD is calling __WFE() even if the SD didn't use it.

As mentioned in

Eirik Midttun over 5 years ago (https://devzone.nordicsemi.com/f/nordic-q-a/4498/difference-between-wfe-and-sd_app_evt_wait/15954#15954)

The sd_app_evt_wait is basically the safe version of WFE when using the SoftDevice. Since the SoftDevice is running in a different context than your application you cannot know if it is safe to use WFE. Therefore, use the SD function.

I should use the function sd_app_evt_wait() to be safe with the SD but on the other hand the implementation of sd_app_evt_wait() in the SD did't contains the workaround till now.

So it is again unclear for me if I should use sd_app_evt_wait() or the workaround?.

Regards,

Dirk

RE: nRF52832 Errata 220 clearification, need more information

dr71 — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 13:42:25 GMT

Hi Susheel,

thank you for your fast and clear answer.

Regards

Dirk

RE: nRF52832 Errata 220 clearification, need more information

Susheel Nuguru — Mon, 02 Mar 2020 13:02:27 GMT

[quote user=""]As far as I understood I can't do anything if the softdevice call sd_app_evt_wait() by itself. Or does this never happen[/quote]

The SD never calls sd_app_evt_wait by itself. It will also not call __WFE by itself.

[quote user=""] I only have to implement the __WFE() in my own application with the workaround inside, and never call[/quote]

Yes, that is correct. You just need to call __WFE in the way that is given as the workaround for this errata.

[quote user=""]A second question, the errata mention a V8.0 but it is not released yet is that correct?[/quote]

Correct, this will be available very soon.