Supermaripro
Member
Ok so I retry today and It didn't not give MMI0 access error so I trained syscon with 40nm EB command... No luck, tried with EC command.. No luck so either board /or reball not working.. I will try another 
Good job on that 65nm COK 002. Happy to hear that.Hi paco I have made 60nm cok 002,
I have also try another 40nm on a cok 002 the reball i think is very good, but when I try syscon training I'm getting an MMIO access error? Is this bad other component? View attachment 40537 View attachment 40537
Thanks paco I have made 2 x cok002 with 65nm, but I have failed 2 x 40nm cok002 but I'm so enjoying doing this I have to stop for a couple of days as I have burned my eyes from heat of reballing machineGood job on that 65nm COK 002. Happy to hear that.
Those MMIO access errors are probably because the address is wrong, w 194... probably a typo.
Should be something like
w 3254 21 EB
But remember the training data only matters when you have RSX:FLEXIO_ID error. If you have some other error, you need to find it first
Good luck
It's all good. I got both 60nm cok002 working, it's only the 40nm I'm having some issues with but I will get one done next week 100%W 194 didn't write nothing so don't worry about it, that address is not accesibile via uart on CXD model. Only SW models can write on addresses from 0x00 up to 0x13ff so nothing was writing on 0x194.
Via uart we can w/r from 3000 to 7400 only on CXD models
Only access from 0x00 to 3000 is with buspirate when ic is out of board.
Sent from my M2007J20CG using Tapatalk
I did have glod with the 40nm.. on 1st of the attempts, firmware was 4.89... Interesting information to know though. ThanksWith 40nm rsx if they get glod is a big chance, not really sure, they are in low fw? Test with sb uart debugging for fw version.
If 3034 and 4002 something from setup 50/50 chances, but can be cell need some attention as well.
Sent from my M2007J20CG using Tapatalk
Thanks, I got this on lock nowWell done for progress.
Im partially responsible of what i publish in wiki and i dont feel confident in publishing that, sorry, it looks more like a pareidolia
![]()
What makes me think this is very unprobable is what i mentioned before
It would mean there is (at least) 8 revisions of the CXD5300xxxx series. Even considering some of the intermediate models im mentioning could be prototypes of rarities that was not produced massivelly, 8 is too much
ofst[ 92]:err_code:0xa0404002, clock:0xffffffff
ofst[ 96]:err_code:0xa0403034, clock:0xffffffff
ofst[100]:err_code:0xa0404412, clock:0xffffffff
ofst[104]:err_code:0xa0403034, clock:0xffffffff