STLINK-V2 Clones, blocked by ST with latest FW, STMCubeIDE 1.10.1 ?

[seppeltronics_v]

Hello,

usually I have Nucleo's that I work with, but I also have an older Clone that I purchased a long time ago when the genuine ones were not available.

I noticed that after a firmware-update within STM32CubeIDE 1.10.1 the Serialnumber is "odd" and it would not detect the target, so I wonder if it is a cabeling-issue or if ST has bricked those?

Does anyone know what is going on?

Thanks a lot, Seppel

[S.Ma]

Confusing. ST-LinkV2 stand alone ST brand and vlone? Or STLink built-in ST Nucleo and cloned Nucleo ?

QUESTION: Does ST works with ST ? (What is guaranteed)

[Tesla DeLorean]

Well some of the newer offerings don't use STM32.

I migrated to CMSIS-DAP as a more general solution.​

[seppeltronics_v]

Hello,

for the STM32CubeIDE 1.10.1 I can say:

• "On Board" debugger of the Nucleo there is no issue.
• Clone with older firmware (2020?, havn't used it since years) there is no issue.
• Clone with latest firmware, single digit serial and cannot connect (same cable):

 

It seems as ST bricks the Clones, but I have no official statment yet, I have asked the suport on this. Not sure why they do it, the V3's are no so cheap, that will make the Clones obolete anyway. Why bother with a slower debugger if you can have the faster one for little more and be sure it works.

However, knowing that these V2 Clones are used by a lot hobbyists, mostly not because they are much cheaper, but because STLinks were mostly sold by B2B shops, it creates a pile of electronics waste. Not really what the planet needs.

Best Regards, Seppel

[Andreas Bolsch]

"older firmware" and "latest firmware" are not very specific. Could give precise version numbers of ST-Link firmware, please?

[seppeltronics_v]

Sure, if you can give me instructions how to, I can give you the exact Versions.

[Pavel A.]

> the Serialnumber is "odd"

What "serial number" is visible in Windows device manager? or lsusb on Linux?

Have you tried the OpenOCD based debugger? 

[seppeltronics_v]

Hello @Pavel A.​ , where do I find that in the Win-Device Manager?

I have an OpenOCD(FTDI2232H) somwhere, but I have actually never used it, so if you could forward a link how to do that on a Windows-machine, that would be very nice.

Thanks a lot, Seppel

[Pavel A.]

> how to do that on a Windows-machine

​

If you have the old good ST-LINK Utility: Target->Settings will show "serial numbers" of all connected ST-Links.

Else...

1. highlight a ST-LINK in the device manager default view (Devices by type)
2. Select View -> Devices by connection and find your ST-LINK (highlighted)
3. If it is a function of a composite device, go up to the 'USB composite device'.
4. Properties-> Details->Device instance path

The instance path should look like

USB\VID_0483&PID_374E\001D00273137510939383538

The last part 001D00273137510939383538 is the "serial number".

There should be no & chars after the PID_xxxx\ part

Are the "serial numbers" on your chinese dongles same as CubeIDE/Programmer shows?

[S.Ma]

Using a sw from one vendor on an another vendor hw is by essence untested and no guarantee. Buying medicine online?

[seppeltronics_v]

Hello,

sorry for the late reply, I was a little busy.

ST-Link with the latest Firmware:

 

 

ST-Link with an older Firmware:

 

The PCB is ok, but many componets are missing to the genuine, and worst of all, a unknown controller (laser-marking removed), so I can't even repurpose the unit.

With the availability of the genuine debuggers via known channels, it's not interesting to buy these. Value for money may be "ok", but given the fact that for a little more you can buy a genuine one that you know it will work, a bad deal.

Best Regards, Seppel

P.S.

The injection-molding is good, maybe even done same mold as the genuine. The ribbing, the supports,.. or they have really put in a lot of effort.

[S.Ma]

Counterfeits maybe cheaper, yet no support, no warranty, and may cost time. If this was sold without any electronics inside, things would be even more profitable.... and this post would not exist.

[Pavel A.]

@seppeltronics_v​ 

Ok, so the latest firmware indeed has the serial number string "C".

The software displays it correctly. The question is, does the software demand a longer string (and why)?

The older firmware does not have the serial number at all.