KBOOT / MCUBOOT on MK22FX512VLQ12

[carlosperez]

Hi everyone,

I was working with MK22 controllers like MK22FN256VLL12 and using the KBOOT v2 without any problems.

I recently made a new board with similar part, MK22FX512VLQ12 but I have a few problems with the same bootloader.

First, I have a problem in the flash init routines, I have a hardfault and reset when try to access some flash registers that I think doesn't exists in this part, in the file fsl_flash.c, "FLASH_Init" routine, there are 2 lines:

config->PFlashAccessSegmentSize = kFLASH_AccessSegmentBase << FTFx->FACSS;
config->PFlashAccessSegmentCount = FTFx->FACSN;

If I comment these 2 lines, just to test the rest of the bootloader, like the usb interfase, there is another problem in the clock initiliazation because PLL and/or FLL are diferent in these controllers.

I think is possible to repair this routines, but I don't know if I'll have any other problems after that.

I want to know if there is some new version of this MCUBOOT with support for these parts, or if anyone have a modified version of this bootloader for this microcontroller.

I'm also using the KBOOT with the KDS IDE, but using MCUXPRESSO for all new projects, so it will be great to have this MCUBOOT for the MCUXPRESSO too.

Any help is greatly appreciated!!

Carlos.

[mjbcswitzerland]

Hi Carlos

The MK22FN256VLL12 is an F8 part and the MK22FX512VLQ12 is an F5 part, meaning that there are a number of differences which make them incompatible.
You will need to use the corresponding HW libraries for each device in order to run the same application.

In case of problems remember that the uTasker project includes ports to almost all Kinetis part (including all flavors of K22s) with projects for IAR, Keil, KDS, CodeWarrior, MCUXpresso, Rowley Crossworks, Atollic, CooCox, Green Hills and GCC make file. It also allows more modes to be used in parallel with Kboot if more flexibility is required: http://www.utasker.com/docs/uTasker/uTaskerSerialLoader.pdf

It can be used in instances where Kboot compatibility is required but porting costs and time need to be avoided (and allows complete simulation of Kboot operation in VisualStudio for optimal maintenance).

Regards

Mark