Datasheet Errors........... - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / projects

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2023, 09:20:44 pm
content: Find a datasheet with an error in it?Rant about it here....

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2023, 09:22:04 pm
content: https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/uln2002a.pdfPage 17.Someone didn't check if their vector graphics formatted correctly. Try implementing this example circuit as it looks like it's shown.. Good luck...

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2023, 10:05:57 pm
content: Quote from: Smokey on July 31, 2023, 09:20:44 pmDatasheets with typos and graphic errors: plenty.But the one that really brings my blood to a boil is CD4046/MC14046/74HC4046.The original data sheet was apparently written before PLLs were a big thing, and is deliberately obtuse on how to design the Loop Controller (aka Loop Filter).The RRC filter in the DS will never work for a Type 2 PLL, but was copied from the original DS to the Motorola DS and uncritically propagated to the next generation 74HC4046 DS.I had to go out and find "Phaselock Techniques" by Gardener ($100) and spend a week reading before I realized that the DS was lying to me (plus a TI app note, apparently written by an apprentice with very limited knowledge of PLLs).No wonder that so many people are frustrated with this part.

author: MarkS
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 31, 2023, 10:08:28 pm
content: Quote from: Smokey on July 31, 2023, 09:22:04 pmWhat? All it needs is a bidirectional transistor and a resisuctor!

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2023, 11:50:04 pm
content: Quote from: MarkS on July 31, 2023, 10:08:28 pmI can't find that "resisuctor" anywhere. Just like TI to use obsolete parts in their examples!

author: jbb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2023, 01:11:36 am
content: I can’t name the chip, but it comes from a major brand. Has a Vcc, a Vbackup from coin cell and a Vmain.Data sheet says Vmain is meant to take power from eg a LiPo when Vcc is off. Original application guide said same.Some time later we had grief with data corruption in backup SRAM and looked for updates. Data sheet info for Vmain hadn’t changed. No erratum issued. Application guide quietly changed to say ‘connect Vmain to ground.’ Assholes

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2023, 10:01:56 am
content: Less of an error but more asshole move.Some chips in the STM32H7 had a bunch of stuff changed in the datasheet trough a chip revision. Things like ADC clock dividers changed, registers for USB moved around etc... but most importantly it changes the clock speed of the CPU from 400MHz to 480MHz.So if you designed in that chip and the distributor you bought from had some old stock you might get the old revision chip while using the latest datasheet. I caught this luckily (likely by accident when looking at errata for some problem), however i had to order chips from 3 different distributors before i found one that had the new chips in stock, so all my prototypes would be the same new chip. Since the partnumber has not changed you can't specifically order the 'new one', all you can do is buy it and check the extra revision marking on the chip.Not sure if the old revision chips could already run at 480MHz and they just changed their mind, but the erratas and chanelogs are worded in a way that suggest the do only work to 400MHz. Tho a 400MHz MCU most likely overclocks just fine to 480, they have a lot of safety margin. But still the hardware register changes will break most firmware.

author: igendel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2023, 10:10:24 am
content: [Edit: No, in fact it's the default initialization code that's to blame, not the Datasheet. See posts below]CH32V003 MCU Reference Manual (V1.3), it states that the reset value of bit 15 ("PA12_RM") in register AFIO_PCFR1 is "0", while in fact it is "1".If you're going to use pins PA1 or PA2 as regular GPIOs, you'll have to change it back. Ask me how I know

author: HwAoRrDk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2023, 10:38:27 pm
content: Quote from: igendel on August 01, 2023, 10:10:24 amAre yousureabout that?I have a design using a CH32V003 that uses both PA1 & PA2 as GPIO and I've never had to touch the AFIO_PCFR1 register, which implies that the default reset value of PA12_RM is indeed zero.Also, v1.5 of the Reference Manual (published recently on 20th July) has no changes to the description of PA12_RM compared to v1.3.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 01, 2023, 10:59:24 pm
content: This utter nonsense from TIhttps://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tiduc91/tiduc91.pdf?ts=1690863696363https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/tiduc87a/tiduc87a.pdf?which persists unfixed for many years in several documents through newer revisions even though they fixed it in an article on their E2E forum due to complains. Then based on that, misleading BS has migrated to some other places:https://www.homemade-circuits.com/solid-state-relay-ssr-circuit-using-mosfets/https://conf.uni-ruse.bg/bg/docs/cp20/3.1/3.1-2.pdf(page 18)https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/411909/ac-mosfet-switching-without-any-diodes-low-cost-ac-solid-state-relay-with-mosfhttps://www.ourpcb.com/mosfet-solid-state-relay.html

author: igendel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 12:20:30 am
content: Quote from: HwAoRrDk on August 01, 2023, 10:38:27 pmAbsolutely sure, and verified yet again after reading your reply.Here's the relevant part of my setup code:Code:// Enable clock for ports A,C,DRCC->APB2PCENR |= 0x00000034;// For PA1/2 as GPIO, disable Crystal functionalityAFIO->PCFR1 &= ~0x00008000;GPIOD->CFGLR = 0x44444441; // PD0 = RedGPIOA->CFGLR = 0x44444144; // PA2 = GreenSystem clock is the default internal oscillator. The green LED connected to PA2 is controllable (PA2->Resistor->LED->GND). If I comment out the AFIO line, it's always off.If there's another explanation, I'd love to hear it, since I'm just beginning to learn this IC.Chip is CH32V003F4P6 (TSSOP20). Only tried one unit so far. I'm using MounRiver Studio 1.85, but I'm skipping the default HAL functions to get a better grasp of the low-level stuff.

author: HwAoRrDk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 01:43:08 am
content: Quote from: igendel on August 02, 2023, 12:20:30 amAlso using TSSOP20 package here, with the HSI oscillator, and not using the SPL/HAL, nor even the default start-up code (I changed it not to call HAL's SystemInit() and to disable PFIC HPE).I can't 100% state that the reset value in AFIO_PCFR1 is actually zero for me - I could probably look with a debugger - but whatever it is, I never change it (nothing in my code touches AFIO_PCFR1) and the PA1 & PA2 pins act as GPIOs for me (both are used as inputs). There is one difference in your initialisation to mine, but it would be weird if that made a difference - where I enable the peripheral clocks in RCC->APB2PCENR, I enable AFIOEN in addition to the necessary GPIO ports.Maybe, and this is just speculation, there could be a bug where if you don't enable the AFIO peripheral clock, it doesn't initialise the default value of AFIO_PCFR1 properly?Or, perhaps this was a hardware bug in an initial revision of the chips? What are the markings on your chips? Mine are marked '412309C51'.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 03:45:20 am
content: Quote from: wraper on August 01, 2023, 10:59:24 pmYou could say what you're reacting to...There are several misrepresentations, but the basics are fine i.e. it turns on when it's on and it's off when it's off. They don't mention diode drops so they might as well not exist.There is an awful lot I see, still, of people putting diodes in parallel with MOSFETs, even with the new fangled symbols with the back diode drawn beside the thing already. Well, there's no accounting for poor education I'm afraid; no amount of my saying appnotes are trash, has made a lick of difference, nor complaining to the manufacturers that keep representing things so poorly. The only thing we can do, is guide others to the truth, as we meet them, preferably with humility and grace. Whether they figure out, or accept, the truth, is their own matter.Tim

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 07:08:15 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on August 02, 2023, 03:45:20 amHe could, but it doesn't take long to figure out.They show current flowing through the parasitic body diodes of FETs which are turned on

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 07:46:36 am
content: I mean, it will happen, at some current (I > Vf / Rds(on)). It could happen. Not that itwillnecessarily. It's not a bald faced lie; like I said, it's a misrepresentation.Tim

author: magic
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 09:08:18 am
content: It's a lie by omission, as they fail to show the main principle of operation.And it cannot really happen, because in such case the current would flow through both paths simultaneously.Maybe if the SSR is particularly "underdriven" it could occur that both FETs are at their threshold and the "forward" one conducts by its body diode with negligible channel conduction (but still not zero) while the "reverse" one cannot so it heats up and increases its channel conductance thusly, but I think we are straying further and further from the fundamental principle

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 09:11:21 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on August 02, 2023, 03:45:20 amIt's literally circled. Any significant current basically never passes through the body diodes as both MOSFETs are always in the same ON or OFF state. The only time some current could pass is during state change. It's an utter incompetency of someone who has drawn that as minimum. And as it's a "Basic SSR theory", this garbage has found it's way in many other places.QuoteExcept it describesHOWit works which is totally screwed up.

author: igendel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 09:17:53 am
content: Quote from: HwAoRrDk on August 02, 2023, 01:43:08 amUgh, that's it. I stepped over the code from the top, and startup_ch32v00x.S does call SystemInit, which calls SetSystemClock, which tries to set the clock to 48MHz HSE and meddles with AFIO->PCFR1 along the way. I just didn't notice that call before. So you were right, it's not a Datasheet error. Thank you for helping clearing that up

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 09:49:12 am
content: IME at least as insidious are important things that are buried in a bunch of text so easily missed.Here are a couple from TI and Microchip that have caught me.On the Microchip one, this is literally the only place in the 350+ page datasheet that says these pins can't be outputs, and elsewhere they are listed as being I/O.I was using this device as a sub for a very similar part that was unobtanium (PIC32MX174 vs. 32MX170), so never occurred that there may be different pin limitations. Luckily it was an easy track-hack.

author: HwAoRrDk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 10:24:32 am
content: Quote from: igendel on August 02, 2023, 09:17:53 amSetSysClock() should only be calling one of the functions that changes PCFR1 if you have a SYSCLK_FREQ_*_HSE defined. You've probably still got the default SYSCLK_FREQ_48MHz_HSE defined at the top of the system_ch32v00x.c you're using with your code. Either comment it out (to use default 24MHz HSI) or uncomment one of the SYSCLK_FREQ_*_HSI.I don't know why the hell they made SYSCLK_FREQ_48MHz_HSE the default in all their example code. Even their own eval board only has a damned 24MHz crystal on it and half the people using the MCU elsewhere probably want to use the HSI oscillator.This nonsense is why I jettisoned all of their code and only use the register defines.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 02, 2023, 11:42:00 am
content: I'll just once more will stress significance of this MOSFET SSR nonsense. If I google "mosfet ssr" in incognito mode, google shows this or its derived garbage as 1st, 2nd and 4th results. And many beginners take it at face value

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2024, 07:04:52 am
content: Here's a funny one from an old datasheet.HA-2520 opamp:Original Harris datasheet (correct)=https://docs.rs-online.com/5e64/0900766b80029c41.pdfIntersil datasheet (wrong)=https://pdf1.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/view/177417/INTERSIL/HA2-2520-2.htmlNew Renesas datasheet (correct)=https://www.renesas.com/us/en/document/dst/ha-2520-ha-2522-ha-2525-datasheet?r=505396Right in the second paragraph of the banner spec description they got the slew rate units wrong. 120V/msinstead of 120V/us. How does that make it through review? At least they fixed it in the Renesas version.

author: moffy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2024, 07:32:24 am
content: Quote from: Smokey on January 02, 2024, 07:04:52 amSome people possibly think that the 'm' in 'ms' stands for micro rather than milli.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 03:20:28 am
content: Its not an error exactly.. but the PCB Footprint is shown from the BOTTOM VIEW!!!??? Who does that?https://www.kycon.com/Pub_Eng_Draw/STX-3000.pdf... Also WTF square PCB holes with 90deg corners?

author: Berni
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 05:02:48 am
content: Quote from: Smokey on August 06, 2024, 03:20:28 amYep i had a similar thing happen to be with a SPDT relay, where they show a bottom view in the PCB layout drawing. WHYThis was not noticed until later on because the footprint still fit, but my NC and NO contacts were swapped around.

author: jfiresto
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 03:42:10 pm
content: Quote from: Berni on August 06, 2024, 05:02:48 amThat is common with relays (because of point to point wiring?) and never surprised me as I worked with an engineer who used many of them in the early 1980s. Here is the pinout of a mechanical relay that came out a few years ago:The coil of this relay has 1.3mm pins and the contacts, 1.0mm. What surprised me about the part was its datasheet swaps the diameters. The maker discontinued the part before I could report the error.

author: RFDx
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 07:22:58 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on July 31, 2023, 10:05:57 pmAll the datasheets for the (74HC)4046 PLL/VCO show the same or at least very similar type I, 2nd order PLL examples. There is no mention of type-II PLLs and with voltage output PDs/PFDs and passive filters to my knowledge something that isn't really feasible anyway. The first order RC/RRC filters used are admittedly not particularly effective but technically there is imo nothing wrong. What/where is the error in the datasheet exactly?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 07:37:13 pm
content: Quote from: Smokey on August 06, 2024, 03:20:28 amWell, gazillions of those cheap jacks are used in cheap devices whose (often extra-thin, often phenolic) PCBs are manufactured in such large volumes that the holes are not drilled and milled, but punched. And for those, rectangular holes with square corners are no problem.

author: wobbly
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 07:46:04 pm
content: My favourite datasheet failure is one that bit me a couple of years ago. I wanted to use aMicrochip MCP2221part, which is a simple USB to RS-232 interface. Couldn't be simpler right?So the chip did work a couple of times, but then it quickly became obvious that it was complete garbage. A chip that requires no manual configuration completely failing at it's ONE JOB!So I dug deeper and found there was an errata document for this chip. This document basically said that "the chip doesn't initialise it's internal registers properly. Don't use it! Buy this one instead!"Errata for the MCP2221:https://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/aemDocuments/documents/OTH/ProductDocuments/Errata/80000742A.pdfAs of right now, some big distributors are still unaware of this problem!The MCP2221ADOES work properly and totally solves the problem.Funnier still, it turns out that this part is actually just a PIC microcontroller (their own bread-and-butter product!) and it had been programmed and then been locked down and had it's markings changed to disguise it's nature. Unbelievable!

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 08:11:54 pm
content: Quote from: wobbly on August 06, 2024, 07:46:04 pmI actually was expecting this. Why bother with making a custom design if one can just use a cheap OTP mcu for that? Esp. with such a profit margin. $2 in qty1000, c'mon!

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 08:44:36 pm
content: Quote from: wobbly on August 06, 2024, 07:46:04 pmI use the A part all the time for automated test boards. It's great pushing all the software PC side and not having any firmware on the boards. Plenty of I2C chips to implement all sorts of test stuff.My only gripes are that the python driver libraries have extremely poor USB HID error handling. I had to spent a fair bit of time adding all the exceptions so HID errors didn't crash everything. But that's a python problem not a chip problem. The chip works great

author: wobbly
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 09:42:35 pm
content: Quote from: exe on August 06, 2024, 08:11:54 pmSure, but they didn't have the engineering chops to get it right the first time of asking? Even when theyINVENTEDthe PIC? That's what grinds my gears.The number of times I've had no trouble implementing serial ports myself in micro's. AND they had the nerve to charge a premium for these busted, janky parts and STILL DO!

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2024, 10:15:29 pm
content: Quote from: wobbly on August 06, 2024, 09:42:35 pmJust to be clear, we are talking about a USB - UART bridge (+I2c, +ADC, +DAC, +GPIO). I've "implemented serial ports" too, but I would be insane to think I could write a whole uC USB stack and actually get CDC working reliably let alone all the other stuff they are pushing over HID.

author: wobbly
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 06:13:21 am
content: @Smokey,All of the features of this chip are "solved problems" as it were. Nobody would bother implementing the entire thing from scratch, especially when low cost is an important feature.You'd just use your company's existing IP and add a bit of glue logic.Microchip knew this product was faulty and didn't recall it - sloppy customer care on to of sloppy engineering.

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 10:33:47 am
content: Quote from: wobbly on August 06, 2024, 09:42:35 pmHolly molly, they still sell them?! It seems the bug was discovered in 2017... Not cool, microchip, not cool.My entry for DS errors: for LT1468, on the last page the description for LT1468 and LT1468-2 are swapped:https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/14682fb.pdf. LT1468 supposed to be 90MHz opamp, not 200MHz. I reported that to AD a couple of years ago, they didn't bother acknowledging or fixing it. The mistake cost me ordering wrong parts and several hours of troubleshooting.Oh, and that naming. I'd assume that lt1468-2 is a dual version of lt1468, but it is not. The dual version is lt1469. That "-2" suffix may mean minimal gain.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 11:06:08 am
content: Quote from: wobbly on August 06, 2024, 07:46:04 pmI can see an argument for using a new part number for bug-fixed versions, e.g. where workarounds have been implemented which would be incompatible with the fixed version, or to make it easy to differentiate the fixed version, but in cases like this it seems insane to not obsolete the old version - sounds like something stuck in a corporate policy of never obsoleting things.They could at least put a big warning banner on the datasheet.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 04:37:09 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 07, 2024, 11:06:08 amNot non-A versions are all more expensive (at digikey at least). That's one way to limit sales.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 06:01:18 pm
content: TI does it too. I had to press an FAE for answers, they wouldn't post as such in the e2e thread, but turns out the UCC256303 isinternally NRND. Why they don't tell marketing to say the same, I have no clue. It sure goes further to paint them as an incompetent company.I haven't heard any good reasons why they shouldn't. Mind,I have heard possible reasons.Just notgoodones.But, perhaps those same (bad) reasons, are why MCP doesn't for this one.Tim

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 06:05:08 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on August 07, 2024, 06:01:18 pmhttps://www.ti.com/product/UCC256303Pretty clearly NRND.https://www.digikey.com/en/products/filter/power-management-pmic/dc-dc-switching-controllers/715?s=N4IgTCBcDaIKoGEFgKwDYDMAGDIC6ANCClKAA5QCMRZFklWWAvk0AOne part marked Obsolete, the other NRND

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 06:27:48 pm
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on August 07, 2024, 06:01:18 pmThis can be a difficult situation for a silicon vendor. You have part B that is both better and has a higher profit margin than part A. Should you mark part A as NRND, keep fullfilling orders for existing designs, push B hard, and move on? Well if someone is currently designing part A into something high volume, you might want to hold off on the NRND notice for a while. Rocking the boat makes no sense, unless you are getting to the point of being unable to produce the thing.Industry wide NRND means all sorts of things. It can be "We have something that's better value, which we think you should be using. On the other hand, its a perfectly serviceable product from a mainstream fab", and it can mean "the only fab qualified to make this is about to become unserviceable".

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2024, 06:42:57 pm
content: Quote from: Smokey on August 07, 2024, 06:05:08 pmHah, shame on me for not checking!To be clear, this was a year or two ago -- at which time it was "active" in clear and bold print.At least they finally moved itTim

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 20, 2025, 09:10:35 am
content: Maybe don't make a mistake on the enable signal polarity...https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1036368/lp2951-n-shutdown-pin-polarity?tisearch=e2e-sitesearch&keymatch=LP2951-N#https://e2e.ti.com/support/power-management-group/power-management/f/power-management-forum/1337310/lp2951-n-lp2951acmx-nopb-shutdown-pin-connection?tisearch=e2e-sitesearch&keymatch=LP2951-N#

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2025, 10:02:04 pm
content: https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/ltc2644.pdfThe "Recommended Solder Pad Layout" is the absolute minimum width. It's ridiculously small compared to the part.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2025, 01:17:37 pm
content: Quote from: Smokey on September 05, 2025, 10:02:04 pmSeems pretty reasonable to me for reflow soldering. I assume you’re referring to the 5.1mm total footprint height vs. the 4.9mm of the part. But the 5.1mm is given as a minimum.

author: Terry Bites
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2025, 03:15:46 pm
content: Been down that hole before. Maddening!

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2025, 09:57:32 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on September 06, 2025, 01:17:37 pmYa, that's the issue. Problem here is that "minimum" footprints are not typically also "recommended" footprints. I built my first boards with that footprint as shown and I'm glad I hand assemble my first prototypes because I'm pretty sure my CM would push back on that one if I left it as is. If they didn't say anything, they would probably be cursing my name behind my back.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2025, 08:57:38 am
content: Thedatasheet for TI TPS92201A, a step-down/buck converter for driving parallel LED backlights:The schematic needed is really simple:Notice how the WSON and SOT563 pinouts are a mirror of each other?The error (and not the only one in this datasheet) is the "Layout Example" for the SOT563, right side:It is impossible to use, unless you mount the SOT563 upside down.The example also blithely ignores the fact that the LEDs are supposed to be connected between FB and the other end of the inductor connected to SW.In the Application Information sections, section 8.2.2.2 is copy-pasted from some other TI step-down regulator datasheet, and even has the feedback sense voltage wrong: it's just 99mV for this chip, not 600mV = 0.6V. It's the only part that mentions a voltage divider, for example.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2025, 07:40:29 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on September 07, 2025, 08:57:38 amWow. There is usually an E2E form post about errors in TI datasheets, but I searched and I didn't see one for this part. Probably worth posting something there to give people a heads up.https://e2e.ti.com/

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 08, 2025, 05:04:12 am
content: Quote from: Smokey on September 07, 2025, 07:40:29 pmI also checked for a datasheet feedback form, but didn't find one for TPS92201A.Anyway, since you prodded, I registered and posted ithere at e2e.ti.com power management forum. I just hope the feedback isn't too harsh.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2025, 11:52:50 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on September 08, 2025, 05:04:12 amNot in the slightest, IMHO.