Skip to main content
AHugh.2
Associate III
January 21, 2024
Question

Unable to set STM32U5 RDP password via USB interface

  • January 21, 2024
  • 2 replies
  • 1409 views

Hi,

The STM32U5 has a password feature to restrict RDP regression from level 1 to level 0. However it seems that STM32CubeProgrammer CLI is unable to activate this via the USB interface of the built-in bootloader. If I do it via STLink then it works fine.

The command I send is:

 

.\STM32_Programmer_CLI.exe -c port=USB1 -lockRDP1 0x12345678 0xDEADBEEF

 

Which results in a "Error: Cannot lock RDP level 1." message.

When I do the same with SWD/JTAG interface with the CLI tool then it works fine.

Here is the verbose output. Note cube programmer v2.15.0 and device is current at RDP level 0.

 

Device name : STM32U575/STM32U585
sending an abort request
setting the address pointer to address: 0x0bfa07a0
receiving packet nbr: 0
sending an abort request
UpLoading data
Flash size : 2 MBytes
Device type : MCU
Revision ID : --
Device CPU : Cortex-M33
sending an abort request
setting the address pointer to address: 0x08000000
Error: Cannot lock RDP level 1.

 

 I can't see anything in the reference manual to indicate that this is not possible via the USB interface. Is there a workaround for this?

Thanks.

This topic has been closed for replies.

2 replies

ST Employee
January 23, 2024

Hello @AHugh.2 ,

There is a known issue with the STM32U5 series where the Readout Protection (RDP) level 1 cannot be locked via the USB interface using the STM32CubeProgrammer CLI. This issue has been reported internally

Internal ticket number: 158655 (This is an internal tracking number and is not accessible or usable by customers).

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a direct workaround for this issue at the moment. It has been reported to the development team and is expected to be addressed in a future release of the STM32CubeProgrammer. Until then, you may have to use the SWD/JTAG interface for locking RDP level 1.

BR

Jocelyn RICARD
ST Employee
January 23, 2024

Hello @AHugh.2 ,

yes this is a known issue I already raised internally.

Only workaround I could see would be to use SFI mechanism which may be not what you want.

Best regards

Jocelyn