Reference manual RM0360 got a mistake

blue_eagle · ‎2015-10-29

Posted on October 29, 2015 at 11:54

In the last version of RM0360,page 722, there is no description about the unique ID. But following the instruction of RM0091 I have read the 96bits ID out in some of my F030C8T6s .These numbers from several chips are different with each other and fit the formation described in the manual-have the same lot number but are different in wafer numbers and x y coordinates.

qwer.asdf · ‎2015-10-29

Posted on October 29, 2015 at 13:30

Officially, STM32F030 doesn't have 96-bit unique ID (check the datasheet), so you can't rely on it.

As I understand it (fix me if I'm wrong), sometimes a batch of more feature-rich silicons (for example STM32F031 in this case) may be (for some reason) branded as another microcontroller when they are compatible. The reasons may vary. Maybe they had too many F031 and few F030, so they rebranded some F031s as F030s to not come out of stock. Or maybe there were some F031s which couldn't pass the quality control as F031, but when tested as F030 they passed it, so they were branded as F030.

This occurred to me couple of years ago when I realized that my STM32F101 microcontrollers have 64KB more flash than advertised, and a working USB device functionality (which STM32F101 shouldn't have had).

So check your flash and SRAM sizes too, they may be bigger if you are lucky.

View solution in original post

qwer.asdf · ‎2015-10-29

Posted on October 29, 2015 at 13:30

Officially, STM32F030 doesn't have 96-bit unique ID (check the datasheet), so you can't rely on it.

As I understand it (fix me if I'm wrong), sometimes a batch of more feature-rich silicons (for example STM32F031 in this case) may be (for some reason) branded as another microcontroller when they are compatible. The reasons may vary. Maybe they had too many F031 and few F030, so they rebranded some F031s as F030s to not come out of stock. Or maybe there were some F031s which couldn't pass the quality control as F031, but when tested as F030 they passed it, so they were branded as F030.

This occurred to me couple of years ago when I realized that my STM32F101 microcontrollers have 64KB more flash than advertised, and a working USB device functionality (which STM32F101 shouldn't have had).

So check your flash and SRAM sizes too, they may be bigger if you are lucky.

Amel NASRI · ‎2015-10-29

Posted on October 29, 2015 at 14:29

Hi ze.ala,

Please refer to

https://my.st.com/public/STe2ecommunities/mcu/Lists/cortex_mx_stm32/Flat.aspx?RootFolder=/public/STe2ecommunities/mcu/Lists/cortex_mx_stm32/STM32F0%20Unique%20ID%20Location

regarding the same topic: I confirm that there is no unique ID for STM32F030 devices.

-Mayla-

To give better visibility on the answered topics, please click on Accept as Solution on the reply which solved your issue or answered your question.

blue_eagle · ‎2015-10-30

Posted on October 30, 2015 at 10:17

Hi qwer.asdf

Thanks for your kindly reply.Your experience really opens my eyes.Following your words I checked those bits，unfortunately I am not the lucky dog. haha~ Finally，thank you again.:-)

blue_eagle · ‎2015-10-30

Posted on October 30, 2015 at 10:26

Thank you for your reply, Mayla.

waclawek.jan · ‎2019-03-07

Linkfix for the above: https://community.st.com/s/question/0D50X00009XkfKFSAZ/stm32f0-unique-id-location