But, what can we expect when attempting to read xFlash on a 155? Could a catastrophic failure occur (e.g. freezing or resetting the processor)?
No catastrophic failure would occur.
Hello John,
thank you for your answer.
1) I assume at this point the 155 to be a cheaper part just because it has lower test coverage.. or possibly at least some failed test in some of the "missing" functional blocks.. Is my assumption correct?
By the way, I missed this being somehow mentioned in the data sheet. Do you remember which section of the document reports this information?
2) Code which we would like to run on both chips is actually just bootloader code. We may have boards with either chip and application FW which can either use xFlash or place everything in pFlash (of course only the latter would apply when running on a 155). What we actually need to know is just whether xFlash is used by the application or not. If we run on a 355 we can test a specific xFlash location for a flag (e.g. 0x55AA) which tells us that xFlash is used.
But, what can we expect when attempting to read xFlash on a 155?
Could a catastrophic failure occur (e.g. freezing or resetting the processor)?
If reading xFlash on a 155 can only either succeed or fail "graciously", then we could still use this method (assuming probability that reading will return 0x55AA just by chance to be low "enough", of course).
Thank you again