<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>PowerQUICC Processors中的主题 MPC8548 eTSEC 104 erratum</title>
    <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/PowerQUICC-Processors/MPC8548-eTSEC-104-erratum/m-p/605200#M1672</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;For the MPC8548 eTSEC 104 erratum,&amp;nbsp;i&lt;/SPAN&gt;s it possible to get clarification on what is considered a low platform to Rx_clk ratio and slow memory system?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The SBC that we are supporting has a 400 MHz platform clock, a DDR2 frequency of 200 MHz, and the eTSEC is in MII mode running at a max speed of 100 Mbps. Is it safe to assume that eTSEC 104 is not applicable in this case?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2016 23:12:15 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>robertbracero</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-10-26T23:12:15Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>MPC8548 eTSEC 104 erratum</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/PowerQUICC-Processors/MPC8548-eTSEC-104-erratum/m-p/605200#M1672</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;For the MPC8548 eTSEC 104 erratum,&amp;nbsp;i&lt;/SPAN&gt;s it possible to get clarification on what is considered a low platform to Rx_clk ratio and slow memory system?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The SBC that we are supporting has a 400 MHz platform clock, a DDR2 frequency of 200 MHz, and the eTSEC is in MII mode running at a max speed of 100 Mbps. Is it safe to assume that eTSEC 104 is not applicable in this case?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2016 23:12:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/PowerQUICC-Processors/MPC8548-eTSEC-104-erratum/m-p/605200#M1672</guid>
      <dc:creator>robertbracero</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-10-26T23:12:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: MPC8548 eTSEC 104 erratum</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/PowerQUICC-Processors/MPC8548-eTSEC-104-erratum/m-p/605201#M1673</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;There is no simple criteria to determine if this erratum hits your&lt;BR /&gt;system or not. The key is the memory subsystem load which depends &lt;BR /&gt;on both the clock ratio and activity of other masters. Basically,&lt;BR /&gt;this erratum is very unlikely to hit a 100 Mbps link, but if you &lt;BR /&gt;want to be completely sure, stress load (means, all possible DMA + &lt;BR /&gt;core/cache active) tests are advised.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Have a great day,&lt;BR /&gt;Platon&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------&lt;BR /&gt;Note: If this post answers your question, please click the Correct Answer button. Thank you!&lt;BR /&gt;-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2016 06:06:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/PowerQUICC-Processors/MPC8548-eTSEC-104-erratum/m-p/605201#M1673</guid>
      <dc:creator>bpe</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-03T06:06:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

