4

Before starting on my project, I need to familiarize myself with any possible silicon errors in my dspic.

I saw this for PIC micros, but it doesn't apply to the dsPIC33F that I'm using.

I found a post somewhere (that I can no longer find for some reason) that says I can use MPLAB X to get the silicon revision. It said to go to the Dashboard, and then click the refresh button on the left side. I did that, and then right-clicked the project and chose "Copy to Output". The problem is that the silicon revision is not in the output, shown below:

dspic33f_spi
Device
dsPIC33FJ64MC802
Checksum: 0x03AC
Compiler Toolchain
XC16 (v1.11) [C:\Program Files (x86)\Microchip\xc16\v1.11\bin]
Memory
RAM 17714 (0x4532) bytes
RAM Used: 0.0%
RAM Used: 0 (0x0) Free: 17714 (0x4532)
RAM Reserved: Production Image
Flash 22016 (0x5600) words
Flash Used: 0.0%
Flash Used: 0 (0x0) Free: 22016 (0x5600)
Flash Reserved: Production Image
Debug Resources
Program BP Used: 0  Free: 2
Data BP Used: 0  Free: 2
Data Capture BP: No Support
Unlimited BP (S/W): No Support
Debug Tool
 PICkit3

Other Project Info
RAM Reserved Memory
Production Image
Flash Reserved Memory
Production Image

Control Points.

System Properties
MPLAB X IDE v1.85 - dspic33f_spi : default
os.name : Windows 7
os.arch : amd64
os.version : 6.1
sun.arch.data.model : 64
java.version : 1.7.0_17
java.vm.version : 23.7-b01
java.runtime.version : 1.7.0_17-b02
java.specification.version : 1.7
netbeans.user : C:\Users\dave\AppData\Roaming\.mplab_ide\dev\v1.85
netbeans.projects.dir : C:\Users\dave\MPLABXProjects
netbeans.home : C:\Program Files (x86)\Microchip\MPLABX\mplab_ide\platform
java.io.tmpdir : C:\Users\dave\AppData\Local\Temp\
user.home : C:\Users\dave
user.country : US
user.language : en
sun.jnu.encoding : Cp1252
file.encoding : Cp1252
file.separator : \

Can anyone provide a way to get the information I need? The date code is 1243EWT, which IIRC means that it was manufactured on the 43rd week of 2012.

Dave
  • 3,800
  • 24
  • 41

1 Answers1

5

According the the errata sheet http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80372B.pdf:

dsPIC33FJ32MC302/304, dsPIC33FJ64MCX02/X04 and dsPIC33FJ128MCX02/X04 Rev. A1/A2/A3 silicon is identified by performing a “Reset and Connect” operation to the device using MPLAB® ICD 2 with MPLAB IDE v7.40 or later. The output window will show a successful connection to the device specified in Configure>Select Device. The resulting DEVREV register values for Rev. A1/A2/A3 silicon are 0x3001, 0x3002 and 0x3003, respectively.

More recent, the family errata sheet http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80442H.pdf: Has tables listing device ID and revision codes through revision A5 and states:

The silicon revision level can be identified using the current version of MPLAB® IDE and Microchip’s programmers, debuggers and emulation tools, which are available at the Microchip corporate web site (www.microchip.com).

I don't have your chip, but with a PIC32MX360F512L connected to an ICD3, I get the revision from MPLAB-X by selecting "Debug - Discreet Debugger Operation - Launch Debugger". On the ICD3 window after connecting the ICD3, it reports:

Target detected

Device ID Revision = B4 B6

(For some reason, Microchip put the same revision ID code in revisions B4 and B6 for my device)

I don't think Microchip provides documentation to get the revision from the printed date-code. You could try squeezing it out of your local Microchip rep :)

Tut
  • 4,195
  • 1
  • 21
  • 38
  • Thanks for that link -- I hadn't expected to find the info I needed in the errata, and I can't believe google didn't tell me! :) Currently, I am using the pickit3 for programming, and for whatever reason the output says "Target detected Device ID Revision = 3004". Not sure how that relates to the revisions in the errata sheet! – Dave Aug 02 '13 at 05:01
  • Ah, ok here we go: http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/DeviceDoc/80442H.pdf. This is an updated errata sheet that has a table in it that matches revision IDs. Turns out that 3004 is revision A5. – Dave Aug 02 '13 at 06:13
  • Umm... okay so clearly I didn't read your entire answer closely enough. I didn't click on your second link! :) Sorry about that. – Dave Aug 02 '13 at 06:14