DS90UR910QEVM: DS90UR910QEVM - No I2C communication

Prodigy 160 points

Replies: 26

Views: 624

Part Number: DS90UR910QEVM


I am evaluating DS90UR910QEVM.

Serializer is DS90UR241Q and Deserializer is DS90UR910QEVM.

LVDS link is up and runs fine. I see pass and lock indicator is constantly ON. 

The only trouble that I am getting right now is programming

No response over I2C protocol. Connections are right, conversion works, but no response over I2C communication. Tried several I2C masters but simply SDA/SCL remains always high.

Tried multiple I2C platforms Android, Linux, Windows - multiple I2C devices but simply both SDA/SCL is always high and No response from the slave. 

Tried all possible variation for the I2C slave address but no response. 

PDN is high, BIST is low, S2 all low, ID1,ID0 tried all combination, Config 1 High, Config 0 Low for  DS90UR241Q.

Pull up resistor values are nominal. 

The only modification done to EVM is populating C18, C17.

Any help would be appreciated. 

26 Replies

  • In reply to Daehyun kim:


      We had to find out if it can be replaced. Based on TI policies, there is no replacement for the EVM . You will need to order a new EVM. Also looking at the scope capture, the SDA waveform is always constant level. If SDA is being pulled low(or High), you will see transitions on SDA like what you see on SCLK. Since that is not happening, ie , you are not seeing a transition on SDA and if SDA is always low, then you have to reduce the pullup resistor value on SDA (reduce it to 750 ohms or 1K)



  • In reply to Vijaya Ceekala:

    This is unacceptable.

    Ti store sent me here to get it checked and get a replacement. 

    I purchased this kit from TI shop on 9th August, and ever since then this did not work at all, in terms of i2c communication. 

    Then TI shop agent closed my case as it's E2E support that is responsible for this kind of customer service. 

    And you and me wasted nearly a month here going back and force. But yet again, with all due respect, you cannot explain why clearly nor diagnoise the problem.

    From then and now you keep just talking pull up registers valute to be altered but this is what TI designed.

    In most cases, even if EVM are provided AS-IS, customer expects EVM to work as data sheet provided. 

    With given conditions provided, EVM is behaving abnormally.

    This is violation of contract. I expected this to work as-is, but clearly it didn't work, and you cannot explain why it is not working

    as is. Even if I made the alterlation can you guarantee that it would work? This EVM act weird! now SDA stuck low, but 

    at the other time it was all high without any pull-ups altered. If at least once it showed a proper i2c signaling I would accept any fault on my side, but it wasn't. 

    You are talking about a policy but, what is it? Tell me. 

    In that policy exactly where TI would not service their customer and their product like this? as far as I remember that I am explained by a TI store support

    , indeed, TI do not guarantees EVM like other product, but within 15 days, with given condition that if it is found defective, TI may provide a replacement. 

    I wasted times here at this forum several days and I am afraid all of this does not seem a proper support but playing of words according to my description provided. 

    I will file a chargeback request to my credit card company.

    Even I myself run a small business, but I don't serve like this.

    It's my first time dealing with TI first time, but this is unacceptable and unimaginable. NXP is much better than this. 

  • In reply to Daehyun kim:

    TOS says 

    8.1 Subject to Sections 8.2 through 8.4, 9 and 11 below, TI warrants to Buyer that each Product conforms to TI’s published Specifications for such Product.

    All your suggestion was to do something else than what is published specification.

    This EVM should have worked as published description says, but it didn't.  

    I don't see anywhere in the terms and conditions of sale saying that TI reserves rights to refuse any claim because it's an EVM.

    I know it's not refundable, and I am not asking a refund, but a replacement.

    Your reasoning is not justified in any manner. 

  • In reply to Daehyun kim:

    I think, what we are not able to establish is whether the EVM has an issue yet. Having said that, I do understand your frustration, let me check back with our TI-legal/EVM team and what is OK . If we decide to send a tested 910 EVM, can you let us know what address it would be sent to?



  • In reply to Vijaya Ceekala:

    Thanks for understanding.

    I know you are here to help, but this EVM is a source of frustration for us several days. We are designing a new platform based on Android that does not rely on conventional designs and DS90UR910Q looked promising. If any other i2c slaves are not working with our masters, we'd accept it, but only this particular EVM is troubling. If a replacement becomes available, have it sent to 

    RSNAV.com (Attn: Daniel KIM)

    10122 St-Vincent, 

    Mirabel, Qc




  • In reply to Daehyun kim:


        I will be sending you the details about the process today. Please note  that you may have to return the EVM that you have . I will forward you the details later today