TPS65987DDJ: Difference on the definition of bit 36 on Reg. 0x28 between TRM and Config Utility.

Georg,

Seems like your GUI version is 6.2.12 while the project file is 6.2.8. Recommended way is to create new project file and import settings from older project file. We will check if this field is not supposed to be shown in the GUI.

Thanks so very, very much Ghouse for the so swift response and keen observation!  I did as you said and still have the UVP Debounce option on the GUI.

Also note that bit 10 disappeared from the GUI, but that's something I'll handle with our local TI guy (McKinney) and probably explains why we have been lingering with a 6.2.8 project basis!

Most Grateful,

Georg A. Mussenden

Hi Georg,

I'll have to connect with our team internally on this. I will provide you with an update tomorrow.

Thank you,

Hari

Thanks so much Hari!  Please don't forget to include Dave McKinney with which I have been exchanging a massive E-Mail thread named 

Use of ADC_In1 mode > 0.6 to avert TPS65987D[DJ] glitch on the [internal FET-]switched VBus

on which my last reply on it (of yesterday April 19th) incorporate concerns on this E2E thread.

Again, thanks so very much!

Georg A. Mussenden

Hi,

Yes I will also inform David on this once I can confirm with my team.

Thank you,

Hari

Thanks Hari!  More importantly is for Dave to send that E-Mail [thread] to you.  I can send it to you if you provide me the means (e.g. E-Mail address).

My last reply on it (of Tue. April 19th) pertains my discussion Ghouse's observation about me running on a 6.2.8 project basis whilst using a 6.2.12 Config Utility with it.

Thanks,

Georg

Thanks so much Hari, accordingly I'll keep such bit as 0.

Any concerns with me having a 6.2.8 project basis whilst running a 6.2.12 GUI?  That I'd like you to discuss with McKinney as he understands why I'm using a 6.2.8 basis!

Have an awesome weekend!

Georg

Hi Hari!

It's not that simple due to the ML 6.2.8 project being based on a 6.2.8 project from a partner of both ML and TI which we have to discuss privately.  I believe we need to setup a conference call with Dave McKinney to understand how to handle this matter!

Thanks,

Georg