AnsweredAssumed Answered

STM32F030 bootloader reliability over rated temperature range?

Question asked by Moore.Patrick on Jul 15, 2015
Latest reply on Jul 21, 2015 by Moore.Patrick
I'm thinking about using a STM32F030 in a slave application where a master may need to reprogram the STM32F030 via the bootloader in the field.  I have had good success with this using STM32F100 parts as bootloader slaves.  The HSI on the F100 has a worst case error of 2.5% (well within the 3% error most UARTs easily deal with).  The HSI on the F030 is listed as +/-5% typical over the rated temperature range, which is already too large an error for many UARTs...and the datasheet does not state what the worst case is.  Once the application is running I use the same precision HSE source for both the slave and the master, so they share the same time base in normal operation.

Does anyone have real-world field bootloader experience with the STM32F030 at temperature extremes?  It seems like the bootloader in the F030 might be doomed to failure (unless the parts are really better than the datasheet states). 

I can live with the low-end F100 solution, but my project budget likes the application performance verses cost trade-off of the F030 much better.