- Joined
- Nov 7, 2006
- Messages
- 9,654
- Helped
- 1,191
- Reputation
- 2,401
- Reaction score
- 1,219
- Trophy points
- 1,403
- Location
- Brazil
- Activity points
- 55,989
Hi guys,
I noticed that most important LQFP-100 pins of LM3S6918 are also present on LM3S6965 at same position ( JTAG, POWER, XTAL, etc... ).
And also observed that the following circuit uses few amount of them :
https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/spmu028b/spmu028b.pdf
In case of burning LM3S6918 is it possible to use LM3S6965 instead in that KIT application ?
The question happens because there are not here local avalability of the original uC, and is intended to test it in agressive enviroment.
I checked it out and didn´t find any restrictions to do that, but would appreciate some confirmation.
+++
I noticed that most important LQFP-100 pins of LM3S6918 are also present on LM3S6965 at same position ( JTAG, POWER, XTAL, etc... ).
And also observed that the following circuit uses few amount of them :
https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/spmu028b/spmu028b.pdf
In case of burning LM3S6918 is it possible to use LM3S6965 instead in that KIT application ?
The question happens because there are not here local avalability of the original uC, and is intended to test it in agressive enviroment.
I checked it out and didn´t find any restrictions to do that, but would appreciate some confirmation.
+++