TPS65994AE: Patch Bundle update method TPS6599xAE vs TPS6599xAD

Adding Matt from our marketing team.

Matt, can you provide mysecure access or should the customer go through their local sales team first?

Best,

Alex

Thank you Alex. Looking forward to hear what Matt has to say.

Hi Alex,

Can you share what end equipment you are designing this for? Please note these devices are only intended to support PC/NB and IPC type applications.

If that is aligned with what  you are designing, please let us know which SoC you are using and we can make sure to get you the details you need.

Thanks,

Matt

Hi Matt,

This is for an embedded computing product, hosting a Cortex-A7 type CPU which will run Linux. But again, I am trying to send this Patch Bundle to the PD controller from a microcontroller on our board, before the main CPU is booted. The MCU is a Silabs EFM32 family part.

The PD controller will be used to source a limited amount of power. No power sink/input over USB C. We are going to be switching between USB and DisplayPort alt modes using this PD controller and the TUSB1146 crosspoint switch.

EDIT: Added a little more detail about CPU running Linux and PD controller used for switching alt modes.

Hi Alex,

Unfortunately these devices are really only recommend for use on Intel or AMD SoC systems when following one of their reference designs. Ultimately there should not be any patching changes between AD and AE, but if you are facing issues, it may make more sense to swap out the PD controller on the EVM. Unfortunately all of our EVMs come with the 994AD to start, so this swap would be necessary for this effort.

If you'd like, your corporate account can join our samples program in order to get some free samples of the 994AE for this evaluation. Otherwise, you can also just order a few 994AE to update your EVMs silicon.

Let me know if this helps.

Thanks

Matt

Hi Matt,

Thanks for your reply.

> Unfortunately these devices are really only recommend for use on Intel or AMD SoC systems...

Okay I see. Do you have a USB-PD controller you'd recommend for an embedded ARM platform which might support switching between USB and DisplayPort?

> Ultimately there should not be any patching changes between AD and AE...

My concern is that the GUI application from TI for these parts seems to be performing a different set of commands. The Technical Reference Manual for the AE (SLVUC38) does not mention "PTC*" commands and yet this is what I see the GUI app transmitting.

My hope was that:

• You have documentation somewhere for the AD which _does_ describe how these "PTC*" commands work. I am requesting access to that documentation.
• TI will clarify which patch method should be used on the AE parts going forward. (Is one method going to be deprecated in the future and I should avoid it?)

> If you'd like, your corporate account can join our samples program

Thank you for the offer, I appreciate it. Since starting this thread, I now have our first board spin in hand and so I have access to the 994AE part on our board and will be using that to continue my microcontroller development.

So at this time, I think I have all the hardware I need and samples of the AE won't be necessary.

I would just like to get documentation for the AD part on the EVM I have describing these "PTC*" commands, and get some conformation on which patch commands ("PTC*" vs "PBM*") to use on AE.

Thanks!

Alex,

I apologize for the lack of response here. I have now granted you access to the TPS65994 mysecure resources page where you can find several of our technical reference manuals for these devices. Please review the much more detailed collateral that discusses some of the questions you have. In addition, I've looped in someone who is much more experienced with our PD controller patch update process who may be able to assist you.

Please review the documentation and let us know if there are still specific questions you have.

Thanks,

Matt

Matt,

Thank you for the mySecure access. I downloaded the documents there and tried searching them for any mention of "PTCs" but did not come up with any results.

This does answer my question: "Do the *AD and *AE chips require a different patch bundle sequence?" which is no. But it does not answer my question as to why the TI "TPS65993_4 Application Customization 6.4.31" GUI uses commands like "PTCs" which are not described in your documentation.

• Where is the documentation for this patch bundle sequence using commands like "PTCs"?
• Which set of commands should I be using in my application: the "PTC*" commands or the "PBM*" commands?

Thank you,

Alex

It's almost like your GUI application is always performing the patch bundle sequence described in SLVA972A. But that app note is for TPS65987 and TPS65988. The TPS65994 does not appear to be mentioned in that document.

Because TI's documentation does not match what you actually do in your software, I am finding it frustratingly difficult to determine what you actually expect us customers to implement.

Alex Liu said:

Can I confirm that you are using the below method to patch?

Yes, I was using that "Patch Load" feature shown in your first image when testing out how the GUI tool sends a patch bundle.

Alex Liu said:

The officially supported way to do patching with TPS65994AD and TPS65994AE is through the PBMs, PBMc, and PBMe commands.

Understood. Thank you, this answers both of my original questions.

Alex Liu said:

This TIVA I2C bridge we use does not have sufficient SRAM memory space to support PBMx, patch burst mode.

I see, okay, this makes sense. Thank you for clarifying.

---

I think that does answer all of my questions in the original post. Thank you for your time, we appreciate it.

Regards,

Alex

Glad I could help! Thanks