Incorrect behavior for FIRC Fast IRC Regulator settings in Processor Expert ?

[cipriansalagean]

Hello,

When "Fast IRC Regulator" check box is checked (in below figure the checkbox is not checked) bit "FIRCREGOFF" from register "FIRCCSR" in System Clock Generator (SCG) module is SET (=1). That means the regulator is OFF.

This seems to be in the opposition with the description of the tool-tip (below image).

To have the FIRCREGOFF bit to 0 (FIRC Regulator enabled) I have to un-check the box (like is below).

I use  S32 Design Studio for ARM, Version 2018.R1, Build id: 180815

I hope this helps.

Best Regards,

Ciprian Salageanu

[Robin_Shen]

Hi Ciprian Salageanu,

Thank you for the report!

Seems that the "Fast IRC Regulator" check box should rename to "Fast IRC Regulator Enable".(The description of Processor Expert is correct.)
I try to debug it, the Processor Expert configure the correct value for FIRCREGOFF bit.

Best Regards,

Robin

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If this post answers your question, please click the Correct Answer button. Thank you!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[cipriansalagean]

Hello Robin,

I checked with Segger j-Link debugger, I have FIRCREGOFF = 0 (=FIRC Regulator is enabled) when "Fast IRC Regulator" is unchecked in PE

Best Regards,

Ciprian

[Robin_Shen · Accepted solution]

Here is the feedback from internal team:

Could you please double check and told me which S32K SDK Version you are using?

I  checked both S32K14x RTM2.0.0(not support S32K11x) and S32K1xx RTM 3.0.0, they works as expected, no bugs:

S32K144 FIRC configure tab in Processor Expert clock_manager component(both S32K1xx RTM 3.0.0 and S32K14x RTM2.0.0 are the same):

S32K116 FIRC configure tab in Processor Expert clock_manager component(S32K1xx RTM 3.0.0):

Processor Expert generated codes:

debug result:

You can check your SDK Version based on the following table:

S32K1xx SDK number	SDK Version	S32DS IDE patch/updates package
SDK_S32K1xx_15	S32K1xx_RTM3.0	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP9,10(SR3.0.1) and 11(SR3.0.2)
SDK_S32K1xx_14	S32K1xx_BETA_2.9.2	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP8
SDK_S32K1xx_13	S32K1xx_BETA_2.9.0	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP7
SDK_S32K14x_12	S32SDK_S32K14x_RTM_2.0.0	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP6
SDK_S32K14x_11	S32K14x_BETA_1.9.0	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP4
SDK_S32K14x_10	S32SDK_S32K14x_RTM_1.0.0	S32DS_ARM_v2.0
SDK_S32K14x_09	S32SDK_S32K14x_EAR_0.8.6	S32DS_ARM_v2.0_UP3_K14x_SDK_EAR_086/S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1
SDK_S32K118_10	S32SDK_S32K118_EAR_1.8.8	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP3
SDK_S32K116_00	S32K116_EAR_1.8.7	S32DS_ARM_v2018.R1_UP2

S32DS for ARM v2018.R1 IDE and S32K SDK  patch/updates package download link：https://www.nxp.com/support/developer-resources/run-time-software/s32-design-studio-ide/s32-design-s...

Tips: So far,  we recommend customer to use the lastest RTM version SDK for quality of EAR and Beta version SDK are not guaranteed without strict tests.

For S32K1xx, the recommended SDK version to use is S32K1xx SDK RTM3.0.0 with UP10(SR3.0.1) and 11(SR3.0.2) installed;

Best Regards,

Robin

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: If this post answers your question, please click the Correct Answer button. Thank you!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[cipriansalagean]

Hi Robin,

Thank you for answer and for extensive searches.

The S32K116 mask is ON96V (sorry, I did not seen this question before).

The SDK that we use is S32SDK_S32K116_EAR_1.8.7 with GreenHills compiler v2018.1.4 (I don't know if the compiler is important or not).

CPU component use in project

Since the SDK that we use is quite old now and we still can switch the SDK I will propose on my side to use the SDK that you recommended: S32K1xx RTM 3.0.0

Also with 3.0.0 SDK the issue does not reproduce - I will check on my side also.

Best Regards,

Ciprian

[Robin_Shen]

Hi Ciprian,

Thank you for the report, I need to consult it with internal team.
I have also try to use Segger J Link and P&E Multilink. But the value of FIRCREGOFF seems different on S32K116 and S32K144.

Would you please tell us the mask of your S32K116? I have check the S32K116 _ON96V Errata, no related bugs found.

Best Regards,

Robin

[cipriansalagean]

Hi Robin,

Thanks for answer.

My MCU is S32K116, fordebug I use iSystem WinIdea 9.17.104 and IC500 (blue box) hardware adapter.

On you side (pictures) looks correct, but on my side FIRCREGOFF=0 if the box is unchecked. Please see below pictures:

With this settings in PE (box unchecked)

field FIRCREGOFF = 0  => Fast IRC Regulator is enabled conform with WinIdea debugger 

Complete screen shot of debugger IDE.

Seems that the Debuggers shows us different values in the FIRCCSR registers. I have one more debugger from other company I can try to see what values get with that one.

Also the micro controller is different on my side.

Best Regards,

Ciprian