ADRV strange PHASE behaviour after calibration procedure

pibertozz said:

All chips, and all chip channels are fed by a CW signal @3 GHz with power tuned to have around 0dBFS on digital part.
RX samples are simultaneously dumped by our FPGA through JESD connection.

Can you test with -5dBFS signal level?

pibertozz said:

What I see is different phases on each chip, and this is normal as electric paths are slightly different on board itself,
but every time I perform the procedure described in user manual, "CALIBRATION GUIDELINES AFTER PLL FREQUENCY CHANGES",
phase differences between chips varies (up to +-15 deg), even if we don't modify RX pll frequency.

Are you seeing a different phase at the same frequency from run to run? Hope you are calibrating only when there is a frequency change. Is your frequency change falliing in Type 1 or Type 2. For Type 2, you will have to run ADI_ADRV9025_LOOPBACK_RX_LO_DELAY and
ADI_ADRV9025_TX_QEC_INIT calibrations additionally on top of Type 1 cals.

Hello

1) "Can you test with -5dBFS signal level?" done, no luck!

2) I am seeing different phase at the same frequency almost every run I perform;

3) I am making a Type1 frequency change from the one set in initdata.c: 3.05GHz to 3.0GHz

Can you please check my calMask?,

maybe something is missing or wrong; initCals.calMask = 0xC0D97FF;

of course I run ADI_ADRV9025_TX_LO_LEAKAGE_EXTERNAL once the internal calibrations are done and after enabling PA.

BR

Pietro

Hello

1) "Can you test with -5dBFS signal level?" done, no luck!

2) I am seeing different phase at the same frequency almost every run I perform;

3) I am making a Type1 frequency change from the one set in initdata.c: 3.05GHz to 3.0GHz

Can you please check my calMask?,

maybe something is missing or wrong; initCals.calMask = 0xC0D97FF;

of course I run ADI_ADRV9025_TX_LO_LEAKAGE_EXTERNAL once the internal calibrations are done and after enabling PA.

BR

Pietro

pibertozz said:

maybe something is missing or wrong; initCals.calMask = 0xC0D97FF;

Can you test with cal mask of 0xD37FF and let us know the outcome?

Hello,

It seems the problem was solved by changing calMask as you suggested.

I tested bot type1 and type2 pll changes

What was the matter ?

Pietro