Issue Running MM-IoT-SDK Porting Assistant on ESP32-S3 and ESP32-C6 with Seeed XIAO HaLow

General
1

Hello everyone,

I am currently trying to run the MM-IoT-SDK Porting Assistant using ESP32-S3 and ESP32-C6 with the Seeed XIAO HaLow module, but I am encountering issues during the test process.

I have already tried several troubleshooting steps, including:

However, the results are still the same.

Result on ESP32-C6

The test fails at Verify BUSY pin:

Verify BUSY pin [ FAIL ]

BUSY pin set HIGH but mmhal_wlan_busy_is_asserted() returned false (expected true)

Result on ESP32-S3

The test fails at Read chip id from the MM chip:

Read chip id from the MM chip [ FAIL ]

I have also tried swapping several GPIO pins, but the issue still persists.

Could anyone please advise what might be causing this issue?
Is there any specific configuration, wiring requirement, or known compatibility issue when using ESP32-S3 / ESP32-C6 with the Seeed XIAO HaLow module?

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

2

Hi @arandaiz

The Xiao boards do not route the Busy line and so that test in the porting assistant will always fail. This is not an issue and feel free to ignore this.

Are you always seeing the read chip id failure on the S3 board?
Please can you share which BCF is being loaded and what your Pin-Mapping is for the S3 board

3

Hi,

Thank you for the clarification regarding the BUSY line on the Xiao boards.

However, on the ESP32-C6, after the porting assistant finishes, the BUSY issue seems to affect the functionality. When I try to run WiFi scan, iperf, or other network features, the system only gets stuck and is unable to connect at all.

For the ESP32-S3, I consistently encounter the “Read chip id from the MM chip [FAIL]” error.

The BCF and firmware configuration I am using are:

CONFIG_MM_BCF_FILE=“bcf_mf08651_us.mbin”
CONFIG_MM_FW_FILE=“mm6108.mbin”

Please let me know if there is any specific configuration or pin mapping requirement for the ESP32-S3 that I should verify.

Thank you for your help.

4

Hi @arandaiz , it looks like the BCF is wrong.

Please can you try this: