2384165_en-US

[#1]

S32K358 eMIOS ISR stuck at 85°C

Dear NXP Support Team,

we are facing an issue on S32K358 during temperature tests at around 85°C.

In our application we use 6 eMIOS channels, each one configured to generate interrupts on both PWM edges with a frequency of 200Hz.

At 85°C, the MCU sometimes gets stuck inside one eMIOS ISR. The ISR does not exit because the code checks the interrupt flag by reading the eMIOS registers, but the flag is 0 (file Emios_Mcl_Ip_Irq.c

if (0U != ((Emios_Ip_paxBase[Instance]->CH.UC[Channel].S) & (uint32)eMIOS_S_FLAG_MASK)) 

After debugging, we noticed that when the issue occurs, the variable containing the eMIOS base address is NULL (Emios_Ip_paxBase). When the application works correctly, the same pointer is valid and the eMIOS registers are read properly.

It seems that, in some conditions, the reference to the eMIOS peripheral is corrupted or cleared during ISR execution.

Do you have any indication about possible known issues or root causes, such as stack overflow, memory corruption, concurrent accesses, ISR handling, or temperature-related behavior?

Best regards,

Simon

Re: S32K358 eMIOS ISR stuck at 85°CHi vane,
I'm currently using RTD 7.0.0Re: S32K358 eMIOS ISR stuck at 85°C

Hi @simon98 

Which RTD version are you working with? Any additional information would be helpful.

Also, in RTD versions prior to 6.0.0, there was a known issue related to the incorrect memory mapping of static variables within function scope (ARTD-159985).

This issue describes a problem where the variable Emios_Ip_paxBase, defined in both Emios_Mcl_Ip.c and Emios_Mcl_Ip_Irq.c, is assigned inconsistent initialization characteristics. Further details are provided in the Software Release Notes.

BR, VaneB

Re: S32K358 eMIOS ISR stuck at 85°C

Hi @simon98 

Could you please provide a simple application that reproduces the observed behavior? Also, could you confirm whether you are working with a custom board or an evaluation board?

Additionally, could you share how the testing is being performed to confirm that the issue occurs at 85 °C?