Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #31524

Re: Another STM32F103 clone?

Show all headers | View raw

Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl writes:
> > Most clones seem to use Cortex-M3.  GD has GD32E103 with Cortex-M4,
> > but GD docs claim extra features, apparently not present in this chip.
> > Does anybody heard of/seen chip with features above?
> 
> https://www.cnx-software.com/2022/08/12/4-9-can-bus-module-features-gd32e103-cortex-m4-microcontroller/  ?

I normally do not use CAN, but when I enabled clock to CAN I was
able to write to CAN memory on my chip.  So CAN seem to be there.
In fact, usual F103C8 devices (SPI-s, I2C-s, UART-s, timers, DMA) do at
least something resonable, while other devices present in bigger
STM models and some clone chips seem to be not present (using
debugger to read registers give 0, attempt to write are ignored).

There is resonably strong hint that this is not a GD device, namely
JEDEC id is like in STM chips:

(gdb) x/8xw 0xE00FFFE0
0xe00fffe0:	0x00000010	0x00000004	0x0000000a	0x00000000
0xe00ffff0:	0x0000000d	0x00000010	0x00000005	0x000000b1

ROM table is:

(gdb) x/8xw 0xe00ff000
0xe00ff000:	0xfff0f003	0xfff02003	0xfff03003	0xfff01003
0xe00ff010:	0xfff41003	0xfff42003	0x00000000	0x00000000

Report in the net say that GD chips have GD id.  HK also is reported
to have its id.  Another clone has 0.

ATM I only found report about CS/CKS chips to present STM id.  However, there
is claim that CS and CKS are the same chip and my CKS shows non-STM id
(59, I do not have id table to say what it means).  OTOH id may be in flash,
in such case different chip batches may have different id-s...

-- 
                              Waldek Hebisch

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-08 03:30 +0000
  Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-08 11:38 -0800
    Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-09 03:06 +0000
  Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-09 23:23 +0000
    Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2023-01-09 17:38 -0700
      Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-13 02:28 +0000
        Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2023-01-15 20:09 -0800
          Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-17 00:43 +0000
            Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2023-01-16 19:39 -0700
              Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2023-01-16 19:44 -0700
            Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2023-01-16 21:07 -0800
              Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-17 06:04 +0000
                Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2023-01-17 00:10 -0700
              Re: Another STM32F103 clone? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-17 13:48 +0100
                Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-17 17:05 +0000
                Re: Another STM32F103 clone? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-01-17 19:42 +0100
            Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2023-01-17 11:07 -0800
        Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2023-01-15 23:47 -0700
          Re: Another STM32F103 clone? antispam@math.uni.wroc.pl - 2023-01-17 05:41 +0000
            Re: Another STM32F103 clone? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2023-01-17 00:04 -0700

csiph-web