• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 6 replies
  • Subscribers 79 subscribers
  • Views 485 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Original question:

MSP430F123: JTAG ID returned

MSP430F67791: returned JTAG_ID code

Jiri Vlk
Prodigy 50 points
Part Number: MSP430F67791
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: MSP430F67761A, , MSP430F67751A, MSP430F6777A, MSP430F5659

Hello.

When programming the MSP430F67761A and MSP430F67791 processors using spy-bi-wire, I get 0x28 (i.e. 0x14 mirrored) instead of the correct JTAG_ID code 0x91 (i.e. 0x89 mirrored). I can't explain this due to some short circuits in the interfacing with the processor I'm using in the programming fixture. Can the processor send other values (other than 0x89) and what is the meaning of the individual bits in that case?

Thank you in advance for the message.

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 28075 points

    Hi Jiri,

    The JTAG_ID should be returning as expected (0x89).

    How long is your programming cable and have you ever used this setup before? Does reducing your JTAG frequency help at all? 

    Best Regards,
    Brandon Fisher

  • 0 in reply to Brandon Fisher94
    Prodigy 50 points

    Hi. The length of the cable is about 20cm, with the programming jig that I use as a tester at the same time, I have successfully programmed more than 200 identical boards in the past, which were equipped with MSP430F6777A and MSP430F67751A processors, in addition to the two mentioned alternatives. Previously, if there was a problem, the processor did not respond and the code received was 0xFF.

  • 0 in reply to Brandon Fisher94
    Prodigy 50 points

    I'll add one more thing: The test fixture I am programming is programmed in accordance with SLAU320, it uses a modified TI distributed algorithm with added logging of communication between the board being programmed and the MSP430F5659 with 8MHz external clock in the fixture, while the programming is timed by the number of inserted NOP instructions.

  • 0 in reply to Brandon Fisher94
    Prodigy 50 points

    I'll add one more thing: The test fixture I am programming is programmed in accordance with SLAU320, it uses a modified TI distributed algorithm with added logging of communication between the board being programmed and the MSP430F5659 with 8MHz external clock in the fixture, while the programming is timed by the number of inserted NOP instructions.

  • 0 in reply to Jiri Vlk
    TI__Mastermind 28075 points

    Hi Jiri,

    20cm is the upper limit of cable length when used with our target socket boards, that should be fine, but you could try something shorter incase this is marginal for your board design with the MSP43067791A. How many devices/boards are you seeing this on now? 

    Jiri Vlk said:
    I'll add one more thing: The test fixture I am programming is programmed in accordance with SLAU320, it uses a modified TI distributed algorithm with added logging of communication between the board being programmed and the MSP430F5659 with 8MHz external clock in the fixture, while the programming is timed by the number of inserted NOP instructions.

    That approach should work just as well for the MSP430F67791, the JTAG/SBW interfaces are not really different. 

    Best Regards,
    Brandon Fisher

  • 0
    Prodigy 50 points

    The problem was solved by replacing the incorrectly installed push-pull reset monitor with a correct one with an open-drain output.

**Attention** This is a public forum