This thread has been locked.
If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.
flash program/erase cycle limit -1000 cycles
To increase the flash endurance, sector prog/erase is the solution? From previous discussions on the community, sectors are part of the block and all associated sectors should be cycled. So block wise (bank-block-sector) memory partition is required?
So flash life cycle and sector life cycle can be differentiated? Cycling only necessary sectors instead of full chip erase should not affect the life cycle of other sectors? Why to decrease life cycles of unused sectors?
The physical architecture of flash is block based which consist of variable sectors. Erasing single sector in block will affect other sectors. I need the block wise partitioned of flash so that the code partitioned can be done.
On the TMS570LS3137 each sector in bank 7 is its own block. Bank 0 and bank 1 blocks are each 256KB. The first block of bank 0 has 5 sectors. The rest of bank 0 and all of bank 1 have two sectors per block.
The block/sector partitioning is not the only reason that bank 7 has a higher program/erase cycle count than banks 0 and 1. The fewer rows in the bank 7 sectors also allow optimized erase conditions which help extend the life. Yes, erasing all of the sectors within a block will reduce bit line stress, but if you exceed the data sheet limits, you are on you own.