1. Define the Possible Backfeed Situation

Start by naming the nodes on each side of the load switch in the released circuit. Ask the design owner which situation could drive the output side above the input side and which switch state applies then. Keep that description with the circuit reference. A generic backfeed label omits the state information needed to read the manufacturer's reverse-current statement correctly.

Build a short state record from existing design information. Useful fields are the input-side condition, output-side condition, intended ON or OFF command and the event covered. The owner should identify which entries are settled and which are assumptions. This gives procurement a focused requirement without asking it to infer a power sequence or construct a new energised test for an unfamiliar assembly.

Treat an absent supply as an identifiable condition requiring exact-device evidence. It should not disappear into an informal statement that the switch is off. If the available description covers only specified ON and OFF situations, preserve that scope. The engineer can request the additional information needed for another state before the proposed part is presented as meeting the whole backfeed requirement.

2. Match ON and OFF Protection Descriptions

TI's TPS22910A product description names TPS22910A, TPS22912C and TPS22913B/C as providing reverse-current protection in ON and OFF states. Keep those explicit device identities and state descriptions together. The statement is a useful family example, but the requested candidate still needs to be matched to its own documentation. A broad load-switch category does not assign that behaviour to every member.

Make ON and OFF separate rows in the requirement even when one manufacturer paragraph discusses both. Each row should retain the circuit situation and the corresponding source reference. This helps expose a candidate whose available description addresses only one of the requested conditions. It also prevents the procurement summary from losing a state that the engineer considered necessary when the part was originally released.

Where another candidate uses different terminology, ask the reviewer to reconcile the documented meaning. Preserve the original wording and the application question rather than treating similar feature names as identical evidence. Keep any missing state or applicable condition open. The desired outcome is a supported state comparison, with the exact device responsible for each statement, rather than a general assertion about reverse blocking.

3. Separate Reverse Protection from Discharge

The same TI description identifies quick output discharge separately for TPS22913B/C. Retain that variant distinction when recording the family features. Output discharge concerns the output-side discharge function described for those devices; it is a separate question from preventing current towards the input side. A candidate with one headline should not receive the other feature merely because the functions appear in the same family discussion.

Give the output-side requirement its own field when it matters to the application. Ask the owner whether the circuit needs a documented discharge behaviour and which existing requirement defines it. Keep that record beside, rather than inside, the reverse-current state table. This allows the reviewer to identify a change in discharge expectations without inadvertently changing the requirement for backfeed protection.

A supplier description that says protected or discharged should be clarified against the exact code. Request the device reference that establishes which function is intended. If the family contains different discharge options, preserve the offered variant as a proposal until its identity is settled. The feature comparison can then remain precise without choosing external connections or inventing a discharge result for the board.

4. Retain Unreviewed Power States

Bring the state rows and separate discharge requirement into a load-switch release record. Identify the complete ordering code, source document and design revision covered. For each unresolved power state, record the missing evidence and its responsible owner. This is more useful than a single feature checkbox because it shows exactly where the candidate description answers the requirement and where further review is needed.

Keep absent-supply behaviour, transitions and other application conditions under their own review when they are part of the design requirement. The engineer decides what exact-device evidence and application assessment those conditions need. The source's ON and OFF statement should remain attached to its stated scope. It does not create a threshold, response-time conclusion or completed power-sequence evaluation for the customer's circuit.

For an ICULTRA enquiry, provide the permitted load-switch code, quantity and destination, with the required reverse-current states and discharge option clearly identified. Separate a proposed variant and its exceptions from the released item. Retain any engineering decision that changes the accepted state requirement. This enables a sourcing conversation about the actual requested device while the wider power-management decision remains traceable to its owner.

Sources and further reading

Manufacturer documents support the technical guidance above. They do not confirm our stock, authorisation or the condition of any offered lot.