AM1808-1503QHCR vs AM1808-1603QHIR - Beacon EmbeddedWorks

Create Account

Create Account

You are here: >> >> >>

Technical Discussion Group Forum

This forum is provided for user discussion. While Beacon EmbeddedWorks support staff and engineers participate, Beacon EmbeddedWorks does not guarantee the accuracy of all information within in the Technical Discussion Group (TDG).

The "Articles" forums provide brief Articles written by Beacon EmbeddedWorks engineers that address the most frequently asked technical questions.

To receive email notifications when updates are posted for a Beacon EmbeddedWorks product download, please subscribe to the TDG Forum of interest.

TDG Forum

Forums
Search Forum
Advanced SearchTopicsPosts

Prev Go to previous topic

Go to next topic

Last Post 22 May 2023 07:55 AM by Alex Morosov

AM1808-1503QHCR vs AM1808-1603QHIR

3 Replies

Sort:


You are not authorized to post a reply.

Author

Messages

Alex Morosov

New Member
Posts:2

16 May 2023 07:10 AM
Hello, We have been using the SOM SOMAM1808-10-1503QHCR with Windows CE for several years. Now, we would like to test the SOM SOMAM1808-10-1603QHIR as an alternative. According to your description, the only differences are the larger RAM size and temperature range. Currently, we are testing a sample of the SOMAM1808-10-1603QHIR, but unfortunately, we have encountered an issue where our software does not start. Here are the steps we have taken so far: Flashed the primary bootloader arm-mmcsd-ais-456mhz.bin (exactly as we did with the standard SOM 1503). Created an SD card with EBOOTSPIFLASH.nb0 (exactly as we did with the standard SOM 1503). Started the device. Over the serial interface, we only see the following output: "Booting with TI UBL<\r><\n>Device OPP (456MHz, 1.3V)". It appears that the primary bootloader is not initiating the secondary bootloader from the SD card. Do you have any insights into what might be causing this issue? Is there a different primary bootloader for the 1603 SOM, or are there any other differences that we may have overlooked? We would greatly appreciate any suggestions or guidance you can provide to help us resolve this matter. Thank you for your attention to this issue. Best regards, Alex

Adam Ford

Advanced Member
Posts:794

16 May 2023 07:46 AM
I looked up the details of both parts, and as far as I can tell, you're correct in that the differences are RAM and temperature range. This SOM was originally a joint-venture with TI, and TI maintained the software, while Logic PD (now Beacon Embeddedwork) maintained the hardware. TI appears to have pulled their Wiki pages for the AM1808, and their WinCE link appears to be broken. I need to do some investigation, so it might take a little bit before I get back to you. I did confirm that the processor you're using is 456MHz, so it appears you have the proper speed rating. -Adam

Adam Ford

Advanced Member
Posts:794

17 May 2023 11:42 AM
I talked with a colleague of mine, and unfortunately, the WinCE BSP was done outside of Logic PD, so we don't have any of the source code. It's possible that the WinCE code is configuring the memory and/or the memory timings in a way which make the industrial-temperature or larger capacity (or both) version operate improperly. Without the source code, we don't know what's inside. A few things you could try: 1. Contact Witekio who appear to be the company that acquired Addeneo 2. Contact TI's via their E2E Forum 3. If you have the BSP source code, try to enabling debugging messages to see if the WinCE code can give you a better idea of what's going on.

Alex Morosov

New Member
Posts:2

22 May 2023 07:55 AM	Accepted Answer
Hi Adam, Thanks for the answer! With the help of TI's forum I found out that the bootloader EBOOTSPIFLASH and the OS need to be rebuilt with a different setting. In OMAPL138_AM18X.bat the setting for BSP_64MB_DDR has to be deactivated. So the problem is solved. Alex

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Forums Texas Instruments SOMs and Development Kits AM1808 EVM Development Kit