Skip to content

Conversation

@bjoernQ
Copy link
Contributor

@bjoernQ bjoernQ commented Nov 28, 2025

Closes #977

Just in case this also adds an option to fall back to the previous behavior but in general I'd say this should help to not scare new users and reduce noise for seasoned users

Chip::Esp32 => {
if let Some((major, _)) = self.revision {
if major >= 3 {
if let Some((_, minor)) = self.revision {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

these changes are needed after fixing the efuse reading (in a previous PR) - I just noticed it when working on this

@bjoernQ bjoernQ marked this pull request as ready for review November 28, 2025 11:14
Copy link
Member

@SergioGasquez SergioGasquez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! Only one minor nitpick comment! Also, I found out that format was weird:

espflash on  suppress-rom-bootloader-address-resolving [$] via 🦀 v1.93.0-nightly took 3s 
❯ cargo r -r --bin espflash flash espflash/tests/data/esp32c3 --monitor --all-addresses --no-addresses
...
 [2025-11-28T11:50:18Z INFO ] Flashing has completed!
Commands:
    CTRL+R    Reset chip
    CTRL+C    Exit

[2025-11-28T11:50:18Z WARN ] Suppressing address resolution with `--all-addresses` given
                                                                                        ESP-ROM:esp32c3-api1-20210207
Build:Feb  7 2021
rst:0x15 (USB_UART_CHIP_RESET),boot:0xc (SPI_FAST_FLASH_BOOT)
Saved PC:0x40380862
SPIWP:0xee
mode:DIO, clock div:2
load:0x3fcd5820,len:0x15c4
load:0x403cbf10,len:0xc84
load:0x403ce710,len:0x2fd0
entry 0x403cbf1a

See the ESP-ROM:esp32c3-api1-20210207

bjoernQ and others added 2 commits November 28, 2025 13:02
Co-authored-by: Sergio Gasquez Arcos <sergio.gasquez@gmail.com>
@bjoernQ
Copy link
Contributor Author

bjoernQ commented Nov 28, 2025

Thanks! I cannot repro that weird formatting (probably because I'm on Windows) - hopefully my maybe-fix is working

@SergioGasquez
Copy link
Member

I cannot repro that weird formatting (probably because I'm on Windows) - hopefully my maybe-fix is working

It made things a bit better:

[2025-12-01T08:46:16Z WARN ] Using ` --no-addresses` disables address resolution, making `--all-addresses` ineffective. Consider using only one of these flags.
    
    ESP-ROM:esp32c3-api1-20210207
Build:Feb  7 2021

With \n only I get:

[2025-12-01T09:06:29Z WARN ] Using ` --no-addresses` disables address resolution, making `--all-addresses` ineffective. Consider using only one of these flags.
                                                                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                                                   ESP-ROM:esp32c3-api1-20210207
Build:Feb  7 2021

With \r only, I get:

[2025-12-01T09:06:01Z WARN ] Using ` --no-addresses` disables address resolution, making `--all-addresses` ineffective. Consider using only one of these flags.
ESP-ROM:esp32c3-api1-20210207
Build:Feb  7 2021

But not sure if its worth adjusting to my terminal output as we didnt test others setups.

@SergioGasquez SergioGasquez added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 1, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit 1efe57a Dec 1, 2025
41 checks passed
@SergioGasquez SergioGasquez deleted the suppress-rom-bootloader-address-resolving branch December 1, 2025 12:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

espflash fails to resolve some bootloader addresses

3 participants