Excessive sector erase times (evkmimxrt1064_flexspi_nor_polling_transfer)

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Excessive sector erase times (evkmimxrt1064_flexspi_nor_polling_transfer)

Jump to solution
160 Views
tamir_michael
Contributor IV

Hello,

Running the example program indicated in the title, it needs about 17 seconds to erase a single flash sector! The flash data sheet indicated that it needs about 300ms (internally) to erase a single sector. I'm using a MIMXRT1064-EVK evaluation board.

Can anybody please try this too, and tell me what the results are? What could be the root cause?

Thanks in advance.

Labels (2)
Tags (2)
0 Kudos
1 Solution
92 Views
kerryzhou
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi Tamir Michael ,

  Do you use the newest SDK version, in my memory the the last SDK already fix this issue.

  To the old SDK, really have this problem, please check the following information:

The ERASESECTOR index is wrong, when I changed the ERASECHIP to 13, or just use the RT1060 index:

#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READ_NORMAL 7
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READ_FAST 13
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READ_FAST_QUAD 0
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READSTATUS 1
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_WRITEENABLE 2
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_ERASESECTOR 3
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_PAGEPROGRAM_SINGLE 6
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_PAGEPROGRAM_QUAD 4
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READID 8
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_WRITESTATUSREG 9
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_ENTERQPI 10
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_EXITQPI 11
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READSTATUSREG 12
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_ERASECHIP 5

The sector erase time is about 70ms, it's correct.

Wish it helps you!

If you still have questions about it, please kindly let me know.

Have a great day,
Kerry

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
- If this post answers your question, please click the "Mark Correct" button. Thank you!

 

- We are following threads for 7 weeks after the last post, later replies are ignored
Please open a new thread and refer to the closed one, if you have a related question at a later point in time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
5 Replies
92 Views
kerryzhou
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

You are welcome!

 If you have any new questions, welcome to create the new community post, we will help you in your new case!

Best Regards,

Kerry

0 Kudos
93 Views
kerryzhou
NXP TechSupport
NXP TechSupport

Hi Tamir Michael ,

  Do you use the newest SDK version, in my memory the the last SDK already fix this issue.

  To the old SDK, really have this problem, please check the following information:

The ERASESECTOR index is wrong, when I changed the ERASECHIP to 13, or just use the RT1060 index:

#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READ_NORMAL 7
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READ_FAST 13
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READ_FAST_QUAD 0
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READSTATUS 1
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_WRITEENABLE 2
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_ERASESECTOR 3
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_PAGEPROGRAM_SINGLE 6
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_PAGEPROGRAM_QUAD 4
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READID 8
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_WRITESTATUSREG 9
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_ENTERQPI 10
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_EXITQPI 11
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_READSTATUSREG 12
#define NOR_CMD_LUT_SEQ_IDX_ERASECHIP 5

The sector erase time is about 70ms, it's correct.

Wish it helps you!

If you still have questions about it, please kindly let me know.

Have a great day,
Kerry

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
- If this post answers your question, please click the "Mark Correct" button. Thank you!

 

- We are following threads for 7 weeks after the last post, later replies are ignored
Please open a new thread and refer to the closed one, if you have a related question at a later point in time.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
92 Views
tamir_michael
Contributor IV

Kind of funny, I encountered this bug when I reviewed the code after determining that it was misbehaving but I took no action...

0 Kudos
92 Views
tamir_michael
Contributor IV

Hi,

Just downloaded and unzipped SDKs and found the fix myself (corrected in 2.7.0). Thanks again.

0 Kudos
92 Views
tamir_michael
Contributor IV

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. I will compare the relevant code of SDK 2.6.1 and SDK 2.7.0 to see if something changed. Can't actually install 2.7.0 because of an obscure error I posted about recently...

0 Kudos