STM32 silicon errata

[lanchon]

Posted on October 06, 2008 at 16:30

STM32 silicon errata

[lanchon]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Hi,

The datasheets for the STM32F10xxx include appendix A detailing 4 ''important notes'' that apply to revision Z devices. Is this the full silicon errata list? (quite short! 🙂 ) Is this rev Z the only silicon in the wild? If I buy a devel board from some vendor, am I guaranteed to get a rev Z? Thanks!

[16-32micros]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Dear lanchon ,

Yes, It is ;-). When you order an STM32 you will have revB or revZ, there no changes between revZ and revB in terms of functionalities. I hope this help you. Regards, STOne-32

[16-32micros]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Hi ,

All versions have the bootloader, This code can not be erased neither disabled by the user or any application. for more details refer to AN2606 app note on Web. With best regards, STOne-32

[lanchon]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

How very intriguing! It's like that game where you have to spot the 7 differences, but here you can't look at the chips! 🙂

Thanks for the fast answer. I forgot to ask this in my original post: Do all versions in the wild have the bootloader programmed? And could the bootloader be erased or disabled? (sorry I didn't finish reading the docs yet, that's why I'm asking)

[design5]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Hi All:

I am totally confused about the Silicon Revision Code system, or lack thereof, for the STM32 devices. My Keil kit has STM32 revision code of A07 and it has bugs which I have found. The I.A.R. kit in the office has revision code of B02 and it does not have the same bugs I have found. The Errata refers to revision codes of B, Y, and Z, without any clue as to what is the latest version. Whatever happened to revision A in the Errata? Perhaps it has too many bugs to mention. Also, what happened to revision codes C through X? Did ST have 20+ failures before they released Y, then Z? Or did revisions Y and Z come first, then revisions A and B, therefore what happened to revision A in the Errata? Now, to add to the confusion, Digi-Key has revision code C in stock, which is not mentioned in the Errata, and nobody seems to have commented about revision C anywhere I can find in the documentation or chats. Does this mean that revision C is in the same class as A, with too many bugs to mention, or does it mean the C has fixed the Errata bugs which relate to B, Y, and Z silicon? If anybody know the revision sequence numbering system, and at what dates the revisions were released, that would help me figure out what is the latest silicon. What an unnecessary mess ST appears to have created without apparent rhyme or reason. Thank you to anyone who has insight into the revision codes for the STM32.

[jj]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

This becomes even more complicated - few posts down you can read about ST & IAR warning STM32 users NOT to use Rev B or Z! (we are given no explanation - nor the extent of any problem - just to use Rev Y)

My firm's bought several hundred STM32's - we have Revs: A, B, Z and Y. Now comes ''design6'' reporting Rev ''C.'' This from Digi-Key - who weeks ago - implemented an ''apparent'' unilateral major price increase. (in some cases more than 2X!) The natural question - does Digi-Key know something which we - loyal STM32 buyers - should ''also'' know???

[design5]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Hi JJ:

Thank you for your comments. I will have my rev C from Digi-Key tomorrow, and I will have it installed in my Keil Kit on Monday. Then comes the testing. I will post any significant findings here. Garry.

[design5]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Hi JJ:

One more comment about the Revision Number confusion. On the CPU identification markings on the package, the revision code B02 in the bottom right hand corner has large ARM B letters across the top, above the part number. But, the revision code A07 in the bottom right hand corner, has large ARM Z letters across the top. So, even though it is Rev A (according to the Errata instructions where to locate the revision code) the large Z letter across the top adds additional confusion in that an A device may also be a Z device. Perhaps somebody from ST will be able to clear the confusion soon. Garry.

[jj]

Posted on May 17, 2011 at 12:17

Garry/others,

Thanks Garry - beware - the Rev markings change with package. On our 64 pin STM32s I note the multi-mark confusion you identify. And just ''try'' to explain ''how'' to find the Rev mark to your disty - so that they can check. I'm not too fast - just now dawned on me that perhaps ST's Revision system itself requires revision! (or at least better explanation - especially when ''undefined or ill-defined'' markings overlap - and conflict) Assume that you purchased from DK prior to their mid-August, drastic price increase. It may be prudent to check today's prices from several distributors - the special ''value added'' to justify a 2X price somehow escapes my group... [ This message was edited by: jj.sprague on 18-09-2008 15:11 ]