Problems with new flash.h in 10.4

Technical questions regarding the XTC tools and programming with XMOS.
kster59
XCore Addict
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 8:51 am

Problems with new flash.h in 10.4

Post by kster59 »

Nevermind got it to work. Documentation should be updated to show you need to erase flash segment before write.
Last edited by kster59 on Thu Jun 24, 2010 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.


richard
Respected Member
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:46 am

Post by richard »

The example in the tools user guide omits error checking to keep the example concise. I suspect that one of fl_connect() / fl_getNextBootImage() / fl_startImageReplace() are failing. Try checking the return values of these functions. It would also be worth calling fl_getBootPartitionSize() to check the amount to space for bootable images is sufficient to fit the factory image, the upgrade image and any padding needed to ensure images start at sector boundaries.
User avatar
larry
Respected Member
Posts: 275
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:03 pm

Post by larry »

Hello kster59

I will close the support ticket you have created (number 1820). If there is a specific issue that comes out of this investigation, please create another ticket. In the meantime, please note that double posting will not speed up the process of resolving your request.

We have noted down the missing fl_ prefixes and will get that corrected for the next update of the Tools User Guide. Thank you for reporting that.

With regards
-Larry
User avatar
jonathan
Respected Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:07 pm

Post by jonathan »

Re "double-posting" - people should post stuff here and to the ticketing system/support board. Sometimes (often) the community is far faster at helping people than XMOS staff - and that is as it should be.
Image
User avatar
jonathan
Respected Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:07 pm

Post by jonathan »

larry wrote:Jonathan

Customer support is prioritised, which benefits both customers and the company, because it is more efficient than unprioritised best effort - more support with the same head count.

Our policy is to deprioritise support tickets for which there is a duplicate post on the community forum (we are likely to reject the ticket).

Users can double or even triple post if they like, but that's a bad use of support channels - support tickets, support board and community forum have different scope and function.

Our policy is to inform users that double or triple posting will not help resolve their issue faster
Official policy needs to be stated clearly on the XMOS website. This forum is not an official channel.

Anyway, the policy is gibberish.

1. I am a customer.
2. Everyone on this forum is a customer.
3. Customers need support.
4. Support comes from both the community and the company.
5. Therefore customers should be free to post wherever they like, safe in the knowledge that tickets sent to XMOS will not be deleted

Can you imagine any other company saying: "sorry, we're not answering your ticket because you already asked your mates on this forum: http://forumformymates.com/". That's totally insane!

The question of "triple-posting" has only arisen because of the creation of a rather pointless forum on the XMOS website in addition to the ticketing interface and the XCore site.

Frankly, if you have the resources to identify whether something has been double or triple posted and "deprioritise" it, you have the resources to just answer the question. Or does XMOS employ a cheap "de-duplication monitor" at lunchtime?

People posting to the community do so - normally - in the hope of a fast reply from someone with similar problems, and in the hope that it might mean they do not have to wait for XMOS to answer the question via the ticketing interface. I think this currently works WAY better than if people sent you everything via your ticketing system (endless questions are answered here before anyone from XMOS has had a chance to look at it).

This is an XMOS problem - please don't make it a problem for your community or your customers.
Image
User avatar
jonathan
Respected Member
Posts: 377
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:07 pm

Post by jonathan »

jonathan wrote:This is an XMOS problem - please don't make it a problem for your community or your customers.
PS I guess I am assuming we - your community (and your main source of PR, web promotion, tools and documentation review, bug reports, tools test, C, XC, assembler, PCB designs etc etc) - all count as customers? :shock:
Image
User avatar
larry
Respected Member
Posts: 275
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:03 pm

Post by larry »

Jonathan

Thank you for your comments and opinions. I have deleted my previous post and changed my suggestion to kster59 to only inform him that double posting is not helpful rather than discouraging him from doing so.

If you would like to start discussion threads on general topics like customer support and community, please do so in another category - may I suggest General Questions? This place is mainly for technical questions.

Best regards