STM32H573VITxQ RMII interface

alpkra · ‎2024-07-01

I'm planning to build a low-power Ethernet project using the STM32H573VI microcontroller. I need to use an SMPS to lower power consumption because of that reason i choose that MCU. During createation of project, I noticed that STM32CubeMX offers RMII interface configuration, but I've found that RMII_RXD0 and RMII_RXD1 pins are missing in that configuration. Upon checking the datasheet, it appears these pins are not available. Is it normal for CubeMX to display RMII configuration options even if they are not supported, or am I overlooking something?

Additionally, when I tried configuring MII-half duplex, I also encountered missing pins. Could anyone confirm if it's possible to use any Ethernet PHY interface with the STM32H573VI-TxQ variant, especially considering these pin limitations?

SofLit · ‎2024-07-01

Hello,

According to the datasheet, the part number STM32H573VITxQ is an 100 pin SMPS package:

According to Table 15, That package doeasn have the two pins RMII_RXD0 and RMII_RXD1 .

And according to table 2, on 100/144 SMPS packages the Ethernet is not available but some ETH AFs are exposed on some pins due to the constraints of pinouts compatibility in between the product as SMPS packages are consuming more pins then LDO packages.

Hope I answered your question.

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.

View solution in original post

SofLit · ‎2024-07-01

Hello,

According to the datasheet, the part number STM32H573VITxQ is an 100 pin SMPS package:

According to Table 15, That package doeasn have the two pins RMII_RXD0 and RMII_RXD1 .

And according to table 2, on 100/144 SMPS packages the Ethernet is not available but some ETH AFs are exposed on some pins due to the constraints of pinouts compatibility in between the product as SMPS packages are consuming more pins then LDO packages.

Hope I answered your question.

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.

alpkra · ‎2024-07-01

I overlooked the last table you provided in the datasheet, thanks for checking. I hope ST removes the Ethernet option for these MCUs in CubeMX. I noticed that previous versions didn't have the Ethernet option, but it is reappearing after an update.

SofLit · ‎2024-07-01

Need to ask internal teams if it's possible to remove ETH for these specific packages. I'm not sure it will be implemented, but anyway I will ask and get back to you for any feedback: go or no go.

Internal ticket number 185448.

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.

SofLit · ‎2024-12-02

@SofLit wrote:

Need to ask internal teams if it's possible to remove ETH for these specific packages. I'm not sure it will be implemented, but anyway I will ask and get back to you for any feedback: go or no go.

Internal ticket number 185448.

FYI,

For H5, removed ETH from some specific packages in CubeMx v 6.13.0.

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.