STM32CubeFx Examples generated by STM32CubeMX

I had the same problem a while back but I slogged through creating a working CubeMX configuration for the F746 discovery board. At the time I did it, when you chose the exact board, the selection of pin assignments for things like to SDRAM interface and the LCD controller were all wrong. There have been several updates to th libraries since then, so I am not sure if this has been improved or fixed. However I am attaching a current .ioc file that I use for the F746 Discovery board. I am using the STemWin GUI, which needs the LCD controler and SDRAM. The config file has the QSPI interface initialized but I haven't spent time to get that going.

Besides having the configurations correct, there is additional code needed to, for example, use the touch controller on the board, and to finish initializing the SDRAM before use. Those I have taken from the BSP and example code but its a little more problematic for me to attach them.

Hope this helps

Unfortunately the concept significantly over-reaches and fails to deliver. We are years into this experiment, and a solid library has been abandoned and replaced by an endless stream of updates and bug fixes. This Microsoft approach to software, where at some point there is hope of fixing everything and getting closure, does not work.

I'm very skeptical of the value of a code generator that spits out large blocks of canned/boiler-plate code. Such a generator is easy to make, and allows for the auto-generation of the examples over a wide array of chips/boards.

The main problem is that everyone is going to use the output code and it will spread into everything, and as such it needs to be thoroughly tested and validated, and manage errors properly. People who rely on code generators aren't going to have the skills to go through it critically to make it production ready.

There needs to be significantly more effort to release bullet-proof and bug free code, and the software group needs to test real-world applications of the code they are generating, and not be satisfied that it merely 'demonstrates' a level of functionality in some very narrow uses cases.

This could perhaps start with a heavier presence here of the software group responsible to focus them on the problems and real-world uses related to their code. Solid and robust code should not need a lot of support, but it is going to take a lot of effort and focus to get to that point.