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.

TPS65994AE: Which file export from GUI config tool should be used for I2C config?

Part Number: TPS65994AE
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TPS65993,

Hi, we're planning to use the TPS65994AERSLR in a new design and are preparing the code for the microcontroller that will be loading the TPS65994AERSLR's config file via I2C.

The TPS65993_4 Application Customization 6.4.31 Tool offers export of binary, hex and c config files.

Can you confirm that the Patch Bundle for just the "Low Region (TPS6599x)" address region is the correct payload that our MCU should transmit over I2C to configure the TPS65994AE upon each startup?
We could not get the TI tool to generate a C file output when selecting the "Full flash image (TPS6599x)" option.
Regarding the flow chart in Figure 5-1 of SLVUC38, in the "Write Patch Bundle burst data..." step, should the Header ID word of 0xACE00001 be included in the data transmitted to the PD controller?

We are not using an EEPROM.

Thank you.

  • Hi,

    May I know what is the application? Are you looking to pass compliance on this?

    The low region saving option is the correct selection if you want to update PD via I2C.

    You do not need the full flash image if you are not using EEPROM. The full flash image has two copies of config that is meant for region 0 and region 1 of the EEPROM.

    The Header ID word is in the data transmitted to the PD controller

    Regards

  • (I am working with Becky on this project.)

    Excellent, thank you for your response.

    We wish to reduce the part count on our board and since we already have a microcontroller, we would like to use that to configure the USB PD controller instead of an EEPROM. So we are planning to connect the MCU to the USB PD's I2C_EC port and there will not be an EEPROM connected to I2C3m.

    The low region saving option is the correct selection if you want to update PD via I2C.

    [...]

    The Header ID word is in the data transmitted to the PD controller

    Okay great, thank you for confirming.

    Are you looking to pass compliance on this?

    We won't be performing compliance testing right away, but we would like to have that option in the future. Is there something regarding the PD patch bundle or not having an EEPROM on our board that would affect our ability to pass compliance testing?

  • Hi,

    If you are looking to perform compliance testing later I would recommend moving to a newer device. However, you will need to contact your local TI FAE contact for more information on the device.

    Regards

  • I see, thanks for sharing. We appreciate your help.

    Consider this issue resolved!

  • Hi,

    My pleasure!

    Regards