Skip to main content
Visitor II
February 21, 2024
Solved

STM32L4R5 using OCTOSPI2 @LQFP100

  • February 21, 2024
  • 2 replies
  • 1515 views

Is there any chance to use both OCTOSPI (as 2xQSPI) with a LQFP100 package? There is a OCTOSPIM_P2_NCS but no OCTOSPIM_P2_CLK and Multiplexed Mode is not possible (only on P/Q-variants). 

Thanks in advance!

 

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Best answer by Hu44

    Dear @STOne-32,

    Thank you very much for your quick response! 

    Both solutions are a nice idea, particular the 2nd one for other problems too. But doing so there would be the need of using a kind of semaphore to divide the two accesses. That would be at to much parts in the software. So I have to chose a greater package, unfortunately.

    It is a great pity not having a 2nd CLK there.

    Thanks again

    Hu44

     

     

    2 replies

    Graduate II
    February 21, 2024

    Not sure if concurrently, or in memory mapped. You might be able to use the OSPIM to redirect the Port vs Pin mapping for the clocks.

    Could perhaps use an encoder or glue logic to change the CS distribution to multiple devices externally.

    Technical Moderator
    February 21, 2024

    Dear @Hu44 ,

    Welcome in our STCommunity. As you mentioned this use case is supported by the P/Q variant and is more cost effective. on this device it is not possible to have both QSPI memories accessed since no second clock (OCTOSPIM_P2_CLK not available ) but there is a possible workaround :

    connect both memories to the same clock OCTOSPIM_P1_CLK:

    1. Dual-quad mode: software should select between both memories using FSEL bit

    2.using different GPIOs (such PE10/PA3): in that case the software should configure the clock for the memory to be accessed (in AF OCTOSPIM_P1_CLK).

    So the  software can switch between two memories by configuring the clock on the wanted one.

    Hope it helps you .

    STOne-32

     

     

     

    Hu44AuthorAnswer
    Visitor II
    February 22, 2024

    Dear @STOne-32,

    Thank you very much for your quick response! 

    Both solutions are a nice idea, particular the 2nd one for other problems too. But doing so there would be the need of using a kind of semaphore to divide the two accesses. That would be at to much parts in the software. So I have to chose a greater package, unfortunately.

    It is a great pity not having a 2nd CLK there.

    Thanks again

    Hu44