[pupu144]

I knew how to look for a number in *.HIS, but thanks anyway for trying to explain) I didn’t understand what OPs hardware is. Can you tell me?

Same logic - you find the latest SW No., then open GWS60.HWS (or something like that, there are only 4 files like that in each folder) and cross-reference it to a HW No.
This file contains only the latest possible SW for each possible HW within ECU family, so you'll need to work with *.HIS first.

[Pavel_Nikitin]

I knew how to look for a number in *.HIS, but thanks anyway for trying to explain) I didn’t understand what OPs hardware is. Can you tell me?

Same logic - you find the latest SW No., then open GWS60.HWS (or something like that, there are only 4 files like that in each folder) and cross-reference it to a HW No.
This file contains only the latest possible SW for each possible HW within ECU family, so you'll need to work with *.HIS first.

I don’t quite understand what *.HWH has to do with it and what information it contains. I'm interested in why the search result for the last ZB-Nr doesn't match in kmm and *.HIS and why Vadim A.A. says that the definition by kmm is not always correct, but immediately says that the latest ZB-Nr.9212217, which corresponds to kmm and not *.HIS

[pupu144]

Yeah, I did not had these files nearby at the time of writing - I meant inside *.DAT file, not HWH.

For OP's equipment ZB-Nr. 9212217 is indeed the latest.
Although there is a path in .HIS from 9212217 to 9213651 I've mentioned in the beginning - it is for another equipment code (so, different hardware).

So, I would say otherwise in this case - .HIS is not always correct, and KMM data is more trustworthy

[Pavel_Nikitin]

Yeah, I did not had these files nearby at the time of writing - I meant inside *.DAT file, not HWH.

For OP's equipment ZB-Nr. 9212217 is indeed the latest.
Although there is a path in .HIS from 9212217 to 9213651 I've mentioned in the beginning - it is for another equipment code (so, different hardware).

So, I would say otherwise in this case - .HIS is not always correct, and KMM data is more trustworthy

Now I finally understand, thanks for the explanation

[Vadim AA]

Here's an example:
E81_#0910&EAAT%0300*UA11$1CA$205$258$2TM$321$428$441$473$493$494$4AK$502$520$522$530$548$701$7RP$842$845$850$853$863$891$8LR$8S3$ 8SD$8TL$8TN-B055

FRM: 9240525
How would you update it?

[Pavel_Nikitin]

Here's an example:
E81_#0910&EAAT%0300*UA11$1CA$205$258$2TM$321$428$441$473$493$494$4AK$502$520$522$530$548$701$7RP$842$845$850$853$863$891$8LR$8S3$ 8SD$8TL$8TN-B055

FRM: 9240525
How would you update it?

A very interesting example. I was 100% sure that each firmware number appears only once in the KMM, but now I found out that this is not the case. Regarding the question of what is the latest firmware number, I think it is 9390481. Do you think this is correct?

[pupu144]

What you mean? I have only one match - for FRM3R.

Go to .HIS, found the dead-end - 9390481. Check back with kmm_SG - both 9240525 and 9390481 are under the same group "+G;1;866182;A;FRM3R E81 E82 E88 XE 2EH". Update should be valid.

I use SP daten from 3.72 - there were some updates specifically for E89. Maybe it was incorrect before and got fixed, so I don't see any issues you guys are facing?

[Vadim AA]

The correct choice would be ZB 9383040

[Lev]

Hi mates.
Can I have an explanation, please? It seems I made a mistake I updated EGS GKE211, but it had to be GKE215. It was updated by the right soft, but now I can not change the soft (for older versions for example) when I use the right GKE215 (also tried GKE211) modules. WinKFP error 211 (2089,2081,2020).
Ista showed 511B - coding. Now is gone.
What can go wrong if using the incorrect module?
I also have ISTA P for the future, it is much easier to see which modules by which soft should be updated.
Cheers

[pupu144]

The correct choice would be ZB 9383040

Care to explain?
This ZB was determined by ISTA-P? Or is it just it, because you've said so?