Maybe I'm naive but i think hardware cannot afford such condition. Even the name is a hint, software was termed so because it was easier to modify, allowing more errors to get in because you can fix it later at a lower cost.
I'm sure there are tons of bugs, I was told a few stories by people in aerospace industry. But I think they cannot survive if they don't keep the number ultra low, because they can't fix it (well except microcode level).
It's a testament to those unsung heroes that most high-level language users can remain blissfully unaware of how much is automatically fixed by compilers in their emitted instructions.
"When PA12 is used as GPIO or alternate function in input or output mode, the data read from flash memory (bank2, upper 1MB) might be corrupted."
I can't even imagine the head scratching one might go through if hit by this, particularly late in development process (when the firmware becomes larger than 1MB).
Would fabrication failure be considered a bug? Isn't the rate kinda up there for chips that don't make it out of the factory? Not to mention on arrival there's a failure rate.
But also, I don't know too much about this, but when Linus tech tips did a tour of a chip fabrication plant, I remember learning that apparently the high end chips are chips where all the little bits inside all work, and if they detect like, busted wee transistors or whatever, they can just use that chip as a lower power processor. If that's the case that's like... Kinda a bug, but they just "code around it," right?
