Hi,
I have a production batch with MKE15Z256VLL7 MCUs that have a strange marking, there is one more line than usual with the following writing: QUAL3NN (I attach a photo)
I cannot program or delete them in any way with JLink, I attach a log. They are not blocked and in any case J-Link Command cannot execute the "unlock kinetis" procedure.
If I replace the MCU with one with a normal marking, everything works normally (I attach a photo of the "normal" MCU)
Has anything similar ever happened to anyone?
Thanks
Marco
Hello @MarcoAEE ,
Thanks for contacting us. I have never seen such a mark before. Just to confirm, was this chip obtained from NXP's official channels, such as the NXP official website or an authorized NXP distributor?
BRs,
Celeste
Hi @Celeste_Liu,
unfortunately this is information that I don't have with precision.
The project is mine and I have already made other production batches. As for the other batches we relied on a well-known Chinese supplier of PCB and PCBA, through which we purchased the components.
Obviously I also asked them for explanations on the origins of the component and I am waiting for an answer.
However, assuming that it is a fake IC, it seems strange to me that during the connection phase with JLink the component responds correctly. What do you think?
Are there any commands to get more information (type identifier, production batch, etc...)?
Thanks
Marco
Hello @MarcoAEE ,
Thanks for your reply.
For your question: Are there any commands to get more information (type identifier, production batch, etc...)?
-> No commands.
The production batch can be found in the third line of the chip mask. For example, the batch number of this chip is "XNJH2226AM".
How many chips with an additional line do you have?
We need you to confirm the the origins first so that we can help you further. Thank you for your understanding.
BRs,
Celeste
Hi @Celeste_Liu ,
thanks for the reply; I have 10 of them, all the same, with the same marking as the photo attached in the first message.
Can you confirm that the last line cannot possibly have been put by NXP?
Thanks
Marco