You don't like to read the question, do you, Erik?
You, even less, like to read the answers unless they suit you

Instead you guess as to what's there. If it were already answered, I'd not be after an answer, ...
BULLSHIT, you are "after an answer" till you get one you like.

You spew the same sorts of rubbish that, for over a decade, has been flowing from the manufacturers, who clearly haven't bothered with this very serious problem.
I posted "thus you see the appnotes and datasheets with the stupid RC reset". Is that "spew the same" ?

these band-aid chips that are, apparently, also adversely affected by the slow risetimes and noise on Vcc that foul up the MCU, though perhaps not as frequently so.
where, how, what? I know of no such thing and my designs have used 1,000,000+ of them. How many have your 'designs' used?

The first thing I'm trying to do is to establish whether the "problem" that these "RESET IC'S" address is the reset problem, or the FLASH corruption problem.
no need, they address BOTH

What has me running down this road is that there is really only one thing that can corrupt the FLASH content, and that's the coincidence of a functional supervoltage charge-pump and a runaway MCU core.
looking at the flash write (not erase) time I doubt the "functional supervoltage charge-pump" is involved with resetting a bit. Bringing such a device up and down agin in a few microseconds seems "a bit too impressive" since it takes only a few microseconds to write the flash. For setting bits (erase) sure. Whether what I guess/believe here is a fact, is irrelevant since with or without the "supervoltage charge-pump" what hinders an accidential flash write (e.g. from runaway code) from happening during the slooow power down, if no reset is present (as is the case with a RC)?

I see at least two potential problems. (1) The rise .... (2) The rise ...
look past your nose! I have many times stated that the fall time is more of a problem for flash corruption since it, typically, is so much longer.

The reason I'm interested in this is because these two issues can foul up ... the reset IC, and particularly so in the case of the switcher-fed system.
how what where? DO NOT intermix your opinion of suprevisors with the, usually miserable, internal reset circuitry.

One reason I'm interested in the separate problem of flash corruption and faulty reset is that the MAXIM DS89C4x0's had a flash corruption problem despite the fact that the reset IC is built into their MCU.
The reset circuitry built into the uC chips of yesterday (and some of today) is MISERABLE. I asked a person that know about such and was answered "the reset is an analog function and does not fit well on a digital die" That made me think and a purely subjective observation is that the built in resets seem to be quite good on uCs with other analog functions.

I've recently examined a number of commercial applications of Philips' parts, and find that none of the ones I examined that operated in 803x mode used reset IC's. Actually, I've never seen an 805x circuit in a commercial application that used a reset IC.
well the 832,000 scales I were involved with DID have a supervisor and a Philips '32 and external ROM.

I'm still wondering whether anybody here on this forum has ever actually thoroughly compared the results from a circuit with and an identical circuit without the reset IC?
I already did! quoting (which you evidently did not read - is the pot calling the kettle black?) http://www.8052.com/forum/read.phtml?id=133926 "I reworked it with a supervisor, and the yarn went where it should every time"

I'm still wondering how to isolate the FLASH problem from the reset problem. I'm wondering how to control the circuit such that, when one's done with the investigation, one will KNOW whether the problem is in the power supply, the MCU, or the reset circuit.
who gives a friggi'n hoot? When you use a supervisor and proper decoupling IT WORKS!, If you do not IT DOES NOT WORK (reliably). If the need is the flash, the tire pressure ot the kitchen sink is totally irrelevant.
ALSO, I have never seen the need for a supervisor related to switching power or not; however, when using switchers I have seen a somewhat stronger need for proper decopupling and filtering (which you, since you have switcher problems, evidently is incapable of implememting)

Apparently it's been too much trouble for YOU, Erik, and others, to question the marketing literature.
since you absolutely have to repeat this, I will too; I posted "thus you see the appnotes and datasheets with the stupid RC reset". How is that "not questioning the marketing literature"

Erik

Get off the "it worked ages ago, why does it not work today".

Do you want to pour leaded gasoline in your car because that was what you did ages ago?. With unleaded gasoline the engine design is a bit different, but, of course, that is HORRIBLE simply because your '54 Chevy ran on leaded gas.



So, go ahead pour leaded gas in your new car, burn the engine and complain "why does it not work, it used to"