| ??? 04/15/12 15:04 Read: times |
#187156 - What did you do, aside from guessing? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
Nobody can prove that you didn't "fix" the problem
and that irks you immensely. Evidently you are much more interested in your theories than in the fix for them. If you do not have the wherewithal to understand that when the processor is 'operated' below min Vcc without being in reset the behaviousr is undefied, you should abstain from discussing it What I mentioned was the anomalous behavior of the MCU during decay of Vcc while RESET is active . It did, in fact, occur when the supervisor had asserted RESET. but you certainly can't verify what your problem was
my problem was lost flash, that was verified ... and how did you verify that? What was the cause? How did you investigate it? Erik
PS I asked you, in the post you responded to, for suggestions re how to obtain what you require (microscope nanoprobes ...) how come I get your usual blabber instead of an answer? - oh well, I should have expected nothing else from you. I can't get inside the package any better than you can. However, It's a bit of a stretch from "lost flash" to "RESET problem" which is what you concluded. I'd guess it's just as likely your problem would have "gone away", mysteriously as that occurred, if you'd reduced the rise and fall times of Vcc, though that's not been tried at your end, has it? Sometimes, of course, you have little else to start with other than an "educated guess." With MCU's that interact with the outside world only through their I/O ports, you have to know what the timing and internal sequences of the otherwise invisible code will be and how they're reflected in their I/O operations. BTW, I bought my microscope, and that's not difficult. I don't know what you want in the way of nanoprobes. I don't have any of them, myself. I have to work with what I can observe externally. RE |
