Engaging with the vendor... hmmm yes, that's the thing. That was Freescale = and relatively recently became NXP. The support page is NXP but I can imagi= ne the integration with Freescale systems is ... progressing .. even two ye= ars down the track? And of course now NXP is under attack from Qualcomm. An= d Qualcomm is under attack by Broadcom. Ugh!=20 With all the corporate argy-bargy, and inevitable rationalizations, I'm afr= aid that the knowledge base and willingness of support starts to wither. Call me cynical :o(=20 Stephen -----Original Message----- From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of= James Cameron Sent: Thursday, 14 December 2017 7:31 AM To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. Subject: Re: [EE] NXP/Freescale documentation Yes, Sean, I've seen the same kind of documentation problems when using MK2= 0DX256 and the related processors to bring up C Forth. However, I've been a documentation writer, had used Marvell ARM documentati= on for a few years, and was very used to different styles. By far the biggest annoyance when compared to PIC is that the imported IP i= sn't documented by the vendor, so one has to go to ARM for that. For large enough quantities, I'd engage with the vendor. That's what we (a= t OLPC) did with Marvell and we got some good clarifications or documentati= on updates out of it. -- James Cameron http://quozl.netrek.org/ -- http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/chang= e your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclis= t --=20 http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive View/change your membership options at http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist .