MCF5271 (BGA version) do we still apply erata SECF131 to it? This means tie both the CLKMOD1 pin and the RESET line together.

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

MCF5271 (BGA version) do we still apply erata SECF131 to it? This means tie both the CLKMOD1 pin and the RESET line together.

668 Views
peternguyen
Contributor I

Hi all,

 

We now have a batch of production run based on the MCF5271 (BGA version) which has the CLKMOD1 and the RESET pins tied together and won't come out of reset at power up. If we manually reset them while they have power, they will reset and run normally. Is this means we have to disconnect the CLKMOD1 pin and tie it to  3.3V?

Strangely enough, the last batch that has been made with the same circuit arrangement was working perfectly fine until now.

 

Regards,

 

Peter Nguyen.

Labels (1)
0 Kudos
4 Replies

515 Views
miduo
NXP Employee
NXP Employee

We recommend to apply the SECF163 which will not need the SECF131.  If you only apply the SECF131, it may still have problems. See more detail from this post:ColdfireV2, Reset Problems (PLL) and https://community.nxp.com/message/505157 

0 Kudos

515 Views
peternguyen
Contributor I

Hi,

 

I cannot get access to the MCF5275 errata SECF131, SECF163 long term

behavior  document. Perhaps if you can send me a copy of it

thanks.

 

This is the error message when I try to get access to the webpage:

“Unauthorized: Access to this place or content is restricted. If

you think this is a mistake, please contact your administrator or the

person who directed you here.”

 

Regards,

 

Peter Nguyen.

0 Kudos

516 Views
miduo
NXP Employee
NXP Employee

Sorry, I just noticed that the post I quoted is within an internal forum. Anyway, I copied the text as below for your reference:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The customer has systems deployed with the MCF5275 that do not have workarounds for errata SECF131 & SECF163.

Question: If the customer product successfully passes factory test without the work arounds, can it fail due to either of these errata in the future?

Thanks,

-Gary Segal

Gary,

Yes, the devices can fail even if they pass in factory testing.  The design can be marginal and any change to the system could cause a failure.

Regards,

Juan Mendoza

Juan,

Is this due to a change in the device itself over time or changes in voltage, temperature and/or other external items?

Thanks,

-Gary Segal

Gary,

Carlos will send you information we forwarded to Honeywell.  The device does change, but we don't have any data that we can relate to the failure.  Of course the board and everything on it also changes, not only that, but there might be some external factor that isn't taken into consideration during factory testing that happens out in the field.

regards,

juan mendoza

Juan,

Thanks for the fast reply and feedback.  I've got what I need.

-Gary Segal

该文档由下列讨论生成:MCF5275 errata SECF131, SECF163 long term behavior

0 Kudos

515 Views
peternguyen
Contributor I

Hi Fang,

Thanks for your reply,

I tried to access to the material you've referred to MCF5275 errata SECF131, SECF163 long term behavior  but I got this error message:

"Access to this place or content is restricted. If you think this is a mistake, please contact your administrator or the person who directed you here."

Is there a copy of this document placed in a public website (NXP perhaps?) so I can download and have a look?

Regards,

Peter Nguyen

0 Kudos