What is the version of S110 inside S120

[hathach]

HI,

We have just upgraded our application to support the latest S110 v8.0.0 but also evaluated the possibility to use S120 instead of S110, so that our customer only need to upgrade application and get "central-capacity" in the future without upgrading SD (which can cause our product bricked).

As mentioned in the specs S120 essentially contains a S110 inside (or at least what I get from the specs), however the latest S120 v2..0.0 is released several weeks ago. And We are afraid that its contained S110 is much older than the S110 v8.0.0, which is a major release comparing to S110 v7 and could pose some compatible issue with our current application. So my question are

1. what is the equivalent S110 version inside the current S120 (v2.0.0)
2. If it is a variant of version 7, could you guys give us a hint on when the next S120 release with a contained S110v8.

[Darren Vengroff]

Hi hathach,

S110 and S120 do different things. S110 is for implementing peripherals and S120 is for implementing central apps that connect to peripherals. If you need to do both in one device, S130 is what you are looking for.

-D

[RK]

Not quite - not with v2.0.0 of S120 at least, that softdevice can be a peripheral or a central, although only one of them at a time, selectable at boot.

I don't understand the OP's contention that upgrading the softdevice may (sic)"bricked the device" and anyway as new versions are released in the future which may fix bugs then it's something you have to be prepared to do. I'd put on the softdevice which has the capabilities I needed and deal with upgrading that as and when I need to.

[Darren Vengroff]

Thanks for the update. I didn't realize that S120 now offered a boot-time choice.

[RK]

Things change so fast I find it hard to keep up!

[hathach]

@RK We use the dual bank ble bootloader for user to upgrade product's firmware. During development our team did brick (bootloader couldn't start) several device occasionally when upgrade bootloader. In reality user can make lots of mistake such as selecting incorrect files (for firmware, it can still be recovered by re-upgrade). However if user make an mistake with SD, bootloader won't start --> device is bricked since SD is required for bootloader to work. And that will lead to lots of refund and return and frustration.

To sum up, we haven't developed any central features yet, but we like to have it with only a firmware upgrade rather than the dangerous SD upgrade. Hopefully that makes sense.