Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
Jan Waclawek
12/27/11 10:59
Read: 423 times

#185219 - depends
Responding to: David Prentice's previous message
Throughout my "carrier" I tried to avoid mocking up EEPROM in FLASH at all costs exactly because of these issues... I even grabbed on the opportunity to use FRAMs at the very moment they appeared at the market (and used battery-backup RAM before that, although I admit that in the long run that can develop to be a major pain in the **** too).

But that might be because of the rather specific applications I had the opportunity to work on, requiring relatively frequent rewrite of a relatively large number of variables which needed to be preserved during powerdown. Would that be the relatively usual case of "only configuration data, seldom changed", I would probably go for the clumsy FLASH way, maybe maintaining two pages with a marker to indicate the fresher one (I do that with the batRAM/EEPROM/FRAM anyway); otherwise, if speed (granting the cost of FRAM) would not be an issue, I would insist on a different mcu or an external EEPROM (they cost practically nothing these days).

(There is one exception and it is the BASIC52 mod for AT89C51xD2/P89V51RD2, but that again is a rather specific case).

I know this does not help much, but I am afraid it is quite hard to surprise you with something you did not know before... ;-)


List of 6 messages in thread
Strategy for 'FLASH' eeprom      David Prentice      12/27/11 08:17      
   depends      Jan Waclawek      12/27/11 10:59      
   comments      Erik Malund      12/27/11 11:22      
      Avoid flash if you can - unless having wear-leveling chip      Per Westermark      12/27/11 21:13      
         Thankyou for your input      David Prentice      12/28/11 13:39      
            poor tips and no tricks      Jan Waclawek      12/29/11 07:29      

Back to Subject List