Other NXP ProductsのトピックRe: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

pbarrega — Tue, 20 Feb 2024 09:43:20 GMT

Hi,

I'm using a multilink universal debugger probe with CodeWarrior 5.1. Unfortunately i don't able to download firmware into microcontroller because the debugger firmware is not compatible with CodeWarrior 5.1. I have tried to change the debugger firmware with the PEmicro firmware update tool but with this utility i cannot choose manually the firmware file to upload because this procedure is blocked on automatic. Is there a way to choose firmaware to download into the debugger probe?

The debugger probe Multilink universal (revision E) and USB-ML-12 are both compatible each other with CodeWarrior 5.1?

Thanks in advance.

Best regards.

Pasquale Barrega.

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

Pavel_Hernandez — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 03:35:48 GMT

Hello, my name is Pavel, and I will be supporting your case, could you let me know what is your MCU target?

Best regards,
Pavel

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

pbarrega — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 07:33:58 GMT

Hello,

the target MCU is MC9S12S192.

Best regards.

Pasquale Barrega.

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

lama — Mon, 26 Feb 2024 10:18:56 GMT

Hi,

probably not important but could be related info...

The CodeWarrior v. 5.1 is not supported by Win10 or later.

There is a possibility to install CodeWarrior v. 5.2 on the Win10 and add the missing derivatives by the procedure below:

https://community.nxp.com/t5/Classic-Legacy-CodeWarrior/How-to-Add-missing-derivatives-to-CodeWarrior-Classic-HCS12-X-5/m-p/585450

The installation link of the CW v. 5.2 can be found on the site below:

https://www.nxp.com/design/design-center/software/development-software/codewarrior-development-tools/codewarrior-legacy/codewarrior-development-studio-for-hcs12x-microcontrollers-classic-ide-v5-2:CW-HCS12X

Best Regards,

Ladislav

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

pbarrega — Mon, 26 Feb 2024 10:27:20 GMT

Good morning,

thank you for your response.

Code Warrior 5.1 runs on Windows 8 virtual machine.

Best regards.

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

lama — Tue, 27 Feb 2024 06:47:23 GMT

Hi,

what MCU do you use?

You wrote MC9S12S192 ...It does not exist.

Best regards,

Ladislav

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

pbarrega — Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:56:55 GMT

Hello, the correct CPU target is: 9S12G192F0CLL.

Sorry for the mistake.

Best regards.

Pasquale Barrega.

Re: multilink universal compatibility with codeWarrior 5.1

lama — Tue, 05 Mar 2024 08:07:44 GMT

Hi,

I tried to collect all possible issue I met during my support career.

Check Oscillator clock if external osc is used.
Check communication traffic on the BKGD pin- oscilloscope. (the wire on the communication interface can be wrong)
Be sure you have not plugged the multilink in opposite direction to the pinhead connector.
Check the MCU is not secured.
Check the reset meets requirements and behavior described in the data sheet.
If you use some SBC chip then think about its connection to the MCU and possible reset from it.
Check the MCU is not in the reset loop from any reason.
Check you use corresponding project target settings with BDM connection. (For example, P&E micro project target is selected and the board is connected directly by USB cable to the Softec board target interface. P&E micro project target is compatible only with USB BDM multilink, Cyclone PRO or on-board interface circuits if it is presented)
Check the MCU you have selected in the project is the same as on the board.
Issue placement localization:
1. If you are able to test the issue at another board - do it to localize whether issue is in communication or on the board.
2. If you have only one board try to use another MCU to localize whether issue is in communication or on the board.
3. If you have only one board and it has been working previously try to use another MCU to localize whether issue is on the board or in the MCU.
If none of this helps I would suggest you to contact www.pemicro.com support. I smell something wrong with the cooperation of the pemicro driver with the virtual machine. I am not sure but we have no experience with such configuration.

Best regards,

Ladislav