Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #10716 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-12-07 21:17 +0700 |
| Last post | 2012-12-14 21:26 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 105 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded
baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 21:17 +0700
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> - 2012-12-07 10:28 -0500
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-07 23:31 +0700
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> - 2012-12-07 12:42 -0500
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? mike <ham789@netzero.net> - 2012-12-07 13:35 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> - 2012-12-07 20:07 -0500
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-07 23:43 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2012-12-07 13:07 -0600
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Dave Nadler <drn@nadler.com> - 2012-12-07 12:09 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-08 03:47 +0700
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? MK <mk@nospam.co.uk> - 2012-12-08 09:44 +0000
8-bit vs. 32-bit MCU's Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-08 18:31 +0700
Re: 8-bit vs. 32-bit MCU's MK <mk@nospam.co.uk> - 2012-12-09 14:13 +0000
Re: 8-bit vs. 32-bit MCU's Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 22:52 +0700
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? upsidedown@downunder.com - 2012-12-08 15:01 +0200
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2012-12-08 15:18 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Glenn <glenn2233@gmail.com> - 2012-12-09 10:47 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] "Paul E. Bennett" <Paul_E.Bennett@topmail.co.uk> - 2012-12-09 10:22 +0000
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] "Bruce Varley" <bv@NoSpam.com> - 2012-12-09 19:07 +0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2012-12-09 13:27 +0000
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2012-12-09 16:19 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] "TTman" <pcw1.cad@ntlworld.com> - 2012-12-09 15:38 +0000
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] amdyer@gmail.com - 2012-12-09 07:45 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] upsidedown@downunder.com - 2012-12-09 17:45 +0200
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2012-12-09 21:30 +0000
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> - 2012-12-09 09:02 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Lanarcam <lanarcam1@yahoo.fr> - 2012-12-09 18:13 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] upsidedown@downunder.com - 2012-12-09 19:44 +0200
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2012-12-09 21:32 +0000
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-10 00:35 -0600
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? [ User friendly RS-232/EIA-232 ? ] josephkk <joseph_barrett@sbcglobal.net> - 2012-12-12 20:30 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? "Meindert Sprang" <ms@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> - 2012-12-10 13:38 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-10 20:19 +0700
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? "Meindert Sprang" <ms@NOJUNKcustomORSPAMware.nl> - 2012-12-10 16:24 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Arlet Ottens <usenet+5@c-scape.nl> - 2012-12-10 16:49 +0100
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> - 2012-12-12 08:50 -0500
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? j.m.granville@gmail.com - 2012-12-11 21:22 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-12 00:29 -0600
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-11 23:43 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-12 02:38 -0600
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-12 07:46 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? linnix <me@linnix.info-for.us> - 2012-12-12 10:50 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-12 12:42 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-12 12:56 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? upsidedown@downunder.com - 2012-12-12 23:22 +0200
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-12 15:39 -0600
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-12 15:13 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-12 15:28 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-12 18:41 -0600
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-12 17:12 -0800
Re: baud rate autodetection on AVR 8-bit? Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-12 12:43 -0800
Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Frnak McKenney <frnak@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> - 2012-12-13 10:25 -0600
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2012-12-13 12:34 -0600
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) upsidedown@downunder.com - 2012-12-14 10:33 +0200
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-14 07:43 -0800
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-13 16:47 -0800
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-13 18:22 -0800
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-13 18:27 -0800
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-13 23:20 -0800
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Frank Miles <fpm@u.washington.edu> - 2012-12-14 17:50 +0000
Re: Communications under pressure (was Re: baud rate...) Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-14 14:28 -0800
serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-14 23:21 +0700
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@technologyhighland.invalid> - 2012-12-14 09:18 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-14 11:19 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-16 21:00 +0700
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-16 13:46 -0800
USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-17 00:53 +0000
Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-16 17:46 -0800
Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-17 13:27 +0000
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2012-12-17 10:32 -0500
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs me@linnix.info-for.us - 2012-12-17 11:13 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-17 12:03 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-17 12:17 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> - 2012-12-17 23:36 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-17 23:54 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-18 13:06 +0000
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs j.m.granville@gmail.com - 2012-12-18 14:04 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-18 14:13 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> - 2012-12-19 02:37 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-19 12:59 +0000
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Rocky <RobertGush@gmail.com> - 2012-12-19 10:19 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-19 10:43 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-19 10:39 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-19 10:44 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> - 2012-12-19 18:42 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-19 21:05 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-20 14:13 +0000
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-20 11:58 -0800
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> - 2012-12-24 00:41 +0000
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> - 2012-12-24 15:45 +0000
Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-24 11:40 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Frnak McKenney <frnak@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> - 2012-12-20 10:00 -0600
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-20 11:54 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@technologyhighland.invalid> - 2012-12-20 12:01 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> - 2012-12-20 12:27 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-14 17:53 +0000
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-15 01:26 +0700
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-14 19:30 +0000
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-15 11:25 +0700
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2012-12-17 00:29 +0000
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs me@linnix.info-for.us - 2012-12-17 11:05 -0800
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Rich Webb <bbew.ar@mapson.nozirev.ten> - 2012-12-14 14:34 -0500
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2012-12-14 23:25 +0000
finer pitches Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> - 2012-12-16 20:48 +0700
Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs Mark Borgerson <mborgerson@comcast.net> - 2012-12-14 21:26 -0800
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | Rocky <RobertGush@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:19 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <0ce73aa8-b2b7-429e-ab83-8d84ca95278f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #10863 |
On Wednesday, December 19, 2012 2:59:12 PM UTC+2, Simon Clubley wrote: > I do know there's a AVR based software-only USB stack but it is USB device > only and only supports low speed connectiosn to a host PC; it does not > have any host support. FTDI also do a host device - AFAIK with own processor etc - "VINCULUM" was what it used to be called.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:43 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <8f24d8l7u5v23pla274kc87tnbmigs5tqa@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10863 |
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 12:59:12 +0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote: >On 2012-12-19, Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> wrote: >> >> You are right that my advice earlier about using libusb sounded >> completely wrong. I thought you were trying to build a USB device, not >> a USB host. They?re very different problems, so ignore my earlier >> message! >> > >That's exactly what I thought as well and it's what my responses have >been assuming. When Jon then talked about adding a keyboard, I thought >he was planning to learn about USB by combining a PS/2 (or similar) >keyboard with a USB device capable MCU to create a USB based keyboard. >Now I don't know. :-) See my response to Christopher. >Jon, are you planning to connect a PS/2 type keyboard to a MSP430 and >then create a USB keyboard for use with a host PC No. >or are you wanting to >take a USB keyboard and connect it to a MSP430 with the final destination >target for the keystrokes been a program running on the MSP430 itself ? Yes. >If it's the former, you only need a MCU with USB device support and there >are plenty of those. If it's the latter, then as already mentioned you >are going to need to a MCU with USB host capability and the most hobbyist >or student friendly of those (if they are building their own circuits) >is probably the PIC32MX. I love the PIC32 processor family and am already ramping up skills there. But it is overkill for some other applications and would drive up cost, size, and power consumption to the point of killing the idea. >I do know there's a AVR based software-only USB stack but it is USB device >only and only supports low speed connectiosn to a host PC; it does not >have any host support. Yes, and there is one for a PIC16: http://www.lendlocus.com/?q=16fusb It's been mentioned here before. But both the AVR and PIC projects merely point in a direction. I'm curious about the more difficult question. Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:39 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <sh14d8ltiv1fitclshhkatpe4f4u2fb83l@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10861 |
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 02:37:52 -0800, Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> wrote: >On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:13:46 -0800 >Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: > >> But I think, if all I need is a stripped down host support >> for a keyboard then perhaps I can fit it. The question is >> about knowledge to know for sure. > >Code-wise, supporting just keyboards is certainly easier than supporting >a wider variety of devices, and if you use BOOTP, even easier than >supporting a full variety of *input* devices. BOOTP is a simplified >form of HID protocol intended for use by things like embedded systems >and BIOS configuration menus; keyboards (and I think mice) support it. >However, you will still need "full" host support at the hardware level. >This is a property of USB: the hardware for a host is somewhat >different to (and bigger than) the hardware for a device. It’s not >physically possible to take a chip that does device mode only and hack >around it to do any kind of host mode. I’m afraid I’m not familiar with >the MSP430 series, but I do know that the STM32F4 series does host >mode, as do some of the higher-end PICs (which jg mentioned). You sound >like you’re looking for something pretty low-end, though, and I agree >with jg, you’re unlikely to find such a chip. > >You are right that my advice earlier about using libusb sounded >completely wrong. I thought you were trying to build a USB device, not >a USB host. They’re very different problems, so ignore my earlier >message! I know that the hardware is different. That's not the issue for me. What's important is the software behind it and how complex it must be. There already are several project web sites I've visited which implement USB, monitoring the Sync Pattern in software and doing the NRZI encoding in software using standard I/O pins coupled to the required hardware for attaching to USB host ports. No hardware support is used if I understand what I've read (I may not have.) I do NOT know if similar things can be done for a host-side implementation to support ONLY a USB-only keyboard, or not. I mean a keyboard that does NOT support PS/2 mode. (I have complete docs on doing that.) Not all keyboards support a connection via either USB or PS/2. I already know how to talk with PS/2 (I have the original docs from IBM still and have used that information before -- did you know that the BIOS supports downloading code via the keyboard interface?) I'm curious about the idea of supporting USB-only keyboards with processors which do not have any USB peripheral support at all. It's likely that it isn't worth the trouble in a real product, but I'm curious partly because some of the products I've worked on before succeeded because they did things with better margins, less power, and smaller size than the competition using processors that were less obvious choices. Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 10:44 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <on24d851jvumfna90ieqeeh4g4l09jie8m@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10865 |
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:39:30 -0800, I wrote: >No hardware support is used if I >understand what I've read (I may not have.) I mean... "No peripheral hardware support within the cpu ..." Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 18:42 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <20121219184216.103e238c@kruskal.chead> |
| In reply to | #10867 |
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:44:43 -0800 Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:39:30 -0800, I wrote: > > >No hardware support is used if I > >understand what I've read (I may not have.) > > I mean... "No peripheral hardware support within the cpu ..." > > Jon I guess you might be able to do something like the V-USB project (the software-only device-side USB stack for AVR). Maybe you would want a bit faster CPU (just because the host-side stuff is probably a bit more complex—though it does have the advantage that a host doesn’t need to always watch the wires for traffic the way a device does), and it would not be USB compliant (because a compliant USB host must support at least low speed *and* full speed, while a device only needs to support one or the other, and you would probably only implement low speed), but in the limited case of plugging in USB keyboards, it might work. At least, you could probably get it to work with *most* keyboards. Chris
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-19 21:05 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <f375d8p0q6jvb332535j3e2t54ke6jp4v6@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10868 |
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:42:16 -0800, Christopher Head <chead@is.invalid> wrote: >On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:44:43 -0800 >Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:39:30 -0800, I wrote: >> >> >No hardware support is used if I >> >understand what I've read (I may not have.) >> >> I mean... "No peripheral hardware support within the cpu ..." >> >> Jon > >I guess you might be able to do something like the V-USB project (the >software-only device-side USB stack for AVR). Maybe you would want a >bit faster CPU (just because the host-side stuff is probably a bit more >complex—though it does have the advantage that a host doesn’t need to >always watch the wires for traffic the way a device does), and it would >not be USB compliant (because a compliant USB host must support at >least low speed *and* full speed, while a device only needs to support >one or the other, and you would probably only implement low speed), but >in the limited case of plugging in USB keyboards, it might work. At >least, you could probably get it to work with *most* keyboards. > >Chris Thanks, Chris. That doesn't say I can't do it, or that I necessarily can. But maybe. At least the door remains open, so far. I appreciate your thoughts very much, Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-20 14:13 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <kav6dn$fsj$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #10869 |
On 2012-12-19, Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:42:16 -0800, Christopher Head ><chead@is.invalid> wrote: > >>On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:44:43 -0800 >>Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:39:30 -0800, I wrote: >>> >>> >No hardware support is used if I >>> >understand what I've read (I may not have.) >>> >>> I mean... "No peripheral hardware support within the cpu ..." >>> >>> Jon >> >>I guess you might be able to do something like the V-USB project (the >>software-only device-side USB stack for AVR). Maybe you would want a >>bit faster CPU (just because the host-side stuff is probably a bit more >>complex?though it does have the advantage that a host doesn?t need to >>always watch the wires for traffic the way a device does), and it would >>not be USB compliant (because a compliant USB host must support at >>least low speed *and* full speed, while a device only needs to support >>one or the other, and you would probably only implement low speed), but >>in the limited case of plugging in USB keyboards, it might work. At >>least, you could probably get it to work with *most* keyboards. >> >>Chris > > Thanks, Chris. That doesn't say I can't do it, or that I > necessarily can. But maybe. At least the door remains open, > so far. > I guess you are going to be reading the full USB spec after all. :-) I am not familiar with the physical signalling level as you don't need that knowledge to write a USB device or host stack which uses a hardware USB controller so I will comment on some other issues. First, are the USB keyboards you can buy today still low-speed devices or are they now full speed only devices ? Given what I currently know, I think you can justify exploring further the idea of a software only low speed USB host, but I don't see how you can implement a full speed host in software on the types of MCUs you are talking about without some hardware support. I've also been thinking about what steps are _required_ from the device enumeration sequence after it's attached to a host. I think it may be possible to drop the reading of the descriptors; there's certainly nothing in my device stack which _requires_ the descriptors to be read before the next stage can complete. The values in the descriptors (for example, the configuration index) are required in later steps of the sequence, but if your host stack already has prior knowledge of the values, I don't see why it would need to read them from the keyboard's descriptors. However, the other steps are all required. For example, during reset I configure endpoint 0, setting the address is required before you can set a configuration and the set configuration stage (at least in my stack) is where you run down the endpoint descriptors and configure the application level (ie: HID in your case) endpoints as required. Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-20 11:58 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <k8r6d8lpu3at4t4e88d4v0i69nvtk6et0f@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10871 |
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:13:11 +0000 (UTC), Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> wrote: >On 2012-12-19, Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: >> On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 18:42:16 -0800, Christopher Head >><chead@is.invalid> wrote: >> >>>On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:44:43 -0800 >>>Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:39:30 -0800, I wrote: >>>> >>>> >No hardware support is used if I >>>> >understand what I've read (I may not have.) >>>> >>>> I mean... "No peripheral hardware support within the cpu ..." >>>> >>>> Jon >>> >>>I guess you might be able to do something like the V-USB project (the >>>software-only device-side USB stack for AVR). Maybe you would want a >>>bit faster CPU (just because the host-side stuff is probably a bit more >>>complex?though it does have the advantage that a host doesn?t need to >>>always watch the wires for traffic the way a device does), and it would >>>not be USB compliant (because a compliant USB host must support at >>>least low speed *and* full speed, while a device only needs to support >>>one or the other, and you would probably only implement low speed), but >>>in the limited case of plugging in USB keyboards, it might work. At >>>least, you could probably get it to work with *most* keyboards. >>> >>>Chris >> >> Thanks, Chris. That doesn't say I can't do it, or that I >> necessarily can. But maybe. At least the door remains open, >> so far. > >I guess you are going to be reading the full USB spec after all. :-) > >I am not familiar with the physical signalling level as you don't need >that knowledge to write a USB device or host stack which uses a hardware >USB controller so I will comment on some other issues. > >First, are the USB keyboards you can buy today still low-speed devices >or are they now full speed only devices ? > >Given what I currently know, I think you can justify exploring further >the idea of a software only low speed USB host, but I don't see how you >can implement a full speed host in software on the types of MCUs you >are talking about without some hardware support. I believe they are low speed, HID. I agree completely that a full speed host would be ... difficult. ;) >I've also been thinking about what steps are _required_ from the device >enumeration sequence after it's attached to a host. I think it may be >possible to drop the reading of the descriptors; there's certainly nothing >in my device stack which _requires_ the descriptors to be read before the >next stage can complete. > >The values in the descriptors (for example, the configuration index) are >required in later steps of the sequence, but if your host stack already >has prior knowledge of the values, I don't see why it would need to read >them from the keyboard's descriptors. Understood. Point taken. >However, the other steps are all required. For example, during reset I >configure endpoint 0, setting the address is required before you can >set a configuration and the set configuration stage (at least in my stack) >is where you run down the endpoint descriptors and configure the >application level (ie: HID in your case) endpoints as required. I'll need to understand more of the spec and think a bit to see what can be done here, I suspect. But I'm keeping all this for later and, as with Chris, I very much appreciate these comments. They will most certainly help focus my attention better. Thanks, Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-24 00:41 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <kb88bd$ber$1@z-news.wcss.wroc.pl> |
| In reply to | #10854 |
Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote:
>
> Doesn't sound like where I'd like to be. I am thinking, say,
> about hooking up a standard, cheap, PC keyboard to a ...
> well, let's say an MSP430 with ... let's give it 16k flash
> and 512 bytes sram total. Hmm. There are six different ones
> with that spec. Three at $1 and three at $2.
>
> Any chance? It is just a keyboard, after all.
>
Look at msp430f550x series. IIRC the cheapest one has
has TI suggested retail price 1.6$. However, RAM
is much bigger than 512 bytes: all in the series have
2kB RAM for USB controller and 4kB data RAM.
--
Waldek Hebisch
hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-24 15:45 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <kb9tb9$pis$1@z-news.wcss.wroc.pl> |
| In reply to | #10901 |
Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote:
> Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote:
> >
> > Doesn't sound like where I'd like to be. I am thinking, say,
> > about hooking up a standard, cheap, PC keyboard to a ...
> > well, let's say an MSP430 with ... let's give it 16k flash
> > and 512 bytes sram total. Hmm. There are six different ones
> > with that spec. Three at $1 and three at $2.
> >
> > Any chance? It is just a keyboard, after all.
> >
>
> Look at msp430f550x series. IIRC the cheapest one has
> has TI suggested retail price 1.6$. However, RAM
> is much bigger than 512 bytes: all in the series have
> 2kB RAM for USB controller and 4kB data RAM.
>
Oops, msp430f550x is device only...
--
Waldek Hebisch
hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-24 11:40 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: Writing a USB device stack, was: Re: USB CDC ACM, was: Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <4rbhd8t43bdoj5c2oea888k8ln8g27umom@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10907 |
On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 15:45:45 +0000 (UTC), Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote: >Waldek Hebisch <hebisch@math.uni.wroc.pl> wrote: >> Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: >> > >> > Doesn't sound like where I'd like to be. I am thinking, say, >> > about hooking up a standard, cheap, PC keyboard to a ... >> > well, let's say an MSP430 with ... let's give it 16k flash >> > and 512 bytes sram total. Hmm. There are six different ones >> > with that spec. Three at $1 and three at $2. >> > >> > Any chance? It is just a keyboard, after all. >> >> Look at msp430f550x series. IIRC the cheapest one has >> has TI suggested retail price 1.6$. However, RAM >> is much bigger than 512 bytes: all in the series have >> 2kB RAM for USB controller and 4kB data RAM. > >Oops, msp430f550x is device only... Thanks for checking on it. I was about to do that, today. Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frnak McKenney <frnak@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-20 10:00 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <eaWdnaErWNCBq07NnZ2dnUVZ_qydnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #10831 |
On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 13:46:10 -0800, Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 21:00:41 +0700, Ivan Shmakov
><oneingray@gmail.com> wrote:
...several attributions lost...
[...]
>> > To OP: For a cheap hobbyist one-off with USB connection I'll probably
>> > just grab an MSP430 LaunchPad off the shelf if the application idea
>> > fits. It's already got connectors for a daughterboard, the cpu is
>> > socketed, comes with two cpus,
>>
>> Somehow, I was unable to find out what exactly comes with this
>> board? But given the price, it indeed looks like a nice thing
>> to have.
>
> You get:
> • Nice box
> • Paperwork
> • ½ m USB cable
> • Microcrystal MS3V-T1R tuning fork 32.768kHz crystal
> • MSP430G2231 cpu, DIP
> • MSP430G2211 cpu, DIP
With the currently-shipping v1.5 LaunchPad boards you get:
MSP430G2553: 16Kb FLASH, 512b RAM, UART/SPI/I2C, 8ch/10bit ADC,
comparator, touch-sense enabled I/Os.
MSP430G2452: 8Kb FLASH, 256b RAM, UART/SPI/I2C, 8ch/10bit ADC,
comparator, touch-sense enabled I/Os.
> • LaunchPad board, which includes a USB to host section
> and a developer section with socket for cpu, two pushbuttons
> for user use (as well as reset), two leds, one green, one
> red, jumpers for enabling and disabling features, a special
> interface for using the board to program target boards as
> well (6-pin EZ430 connector), a power connector for your use
> to run the board, and of course a USB connector
> • four headers for daughter card extensions, 2 male-female
> and 2 male-male
Plus two compiler/IDE suites plus the MSP430 port of gcc.
As for USB, I'm aware of one effort in this direction:
USB v1.1 support on the MSP430 Launchpad
http://www.43oh.com/2012/12/usb-v1-1-support-on-the-msp430-launchpad/
Hope this helps...
Frank McKenney
--
Generations of students in the social sciences have been exposed
to entertaining lectures that point out how dumb everyone else
is, constantly wandering off the path of logic and getting lost
in the fog of intuition. Yet logical norms are blind to content
and culture, ignoring evolved capacities and environmental
structure. Often what looks like a reasoning error from a
purely logical perspective turns out to be a highly intelligent
social judgment in the real world. Good intuitions must go
beyond the information given, and therefore, beyond logic.
-- Gerd Gigerenzer / Gut Feelings: The Intelligence
of the Unconscious.
--
Frank McKenney, McKenney Associates
Richmond, Virginia / (804) 320-4887
Munged E-mail: frank uscore mckenney aatt mindspring ddoott com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-20 11:54 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <4sq6d8lnptm1f8ktaj7ok5hoact816rjho@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10872 |
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:00:28 -0600, Frnak McKenney <frnak@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> wrote: >On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 13:46:10 -0800, Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: >> On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 21:00:41 +0700, Ivan Shmakov >><oneingray@gmail.com> wrote: >...several attributions lost... > > [...] > >>> > To OP: For a cheap hobbyist one-off with USB connection I'll probably >>> > just grab an MSP430 LaunchPad off the shelf if the application idea >>> > fits. It's already got connectors for a daughterboard, the cpu is >>> > socketed, comes with two cpus, >>> >>> Somehow, I was unable to find out what exactly comes with this >>> board? But given the price, it indeed looks like a nice thing >>> to have. >> >> You get: >> • Nice box >> • Paperwork >> • ½ m USB cable >> • Microcrystal MS3V-T1R tuning fork 32.768kHz crystal >> • MSP430G2231 cpu, DIP >> • MSP430G2211 cpu, DIP > >With the currently-shipping v1.5 LaunchPad boards you get: > > MSP430G2553: 16Kb FLASH, 512b RAM, UART/SPI/I2C, 8ch/10bit ADC, > comparator, touch-sense enabled I/Os. > MSP430G2452: 8Kb FLASH, 256b RAM, UART/SPI/I2C, 8ch/10bit ADC, > comparator, touch-sense enabled I/Os. Thanks for the correction. I do remember, now that you bring it up, that the CPUs had changed. I just don't have any to remind me about it. Thanks! >> • LaunchPad board, which includes a USB to host section >> and a developer section with socket for cpu, two pushbuttons >> for user use (as well as reset), two leds, one green, one >> red, jumpers for enabling and disabling features, a special >> interface for using the board to program target boards as >> well (6-pin EZ430 connector), a power connector for your use >> to run the board, and of course a USB connector >> • four headers for daughter card extensions, 2 male-female >> and 2 male-male > >Plus two compiler/IDE suites plus the MSP430 port of gcc. Yes. I've been having almost nothing but trouble with IAR's on my "clean" install of Win7 Ultimate 64-bit, though. I don't know what the problem is, but I've tried it with many different LaunchPads and different USB connectors (the motherboard has a LOT of them) and I also tried doing it with the XP 32-bit VM from Microsoft running underneath without any better success (I didn't expect that to work, anyway.) On the same system, CCS does just fine. Odd thing there, _if_ both are using the same DLL (which maybe they are not.) On a Thinkpad laptop running Win7 Professional, though, IAR works great. And on all my other machines, just fine. But they aren't 64-bit installs. >As for USB, I'm aware of one effort in this direction: > > USB v1.1 support on the MSP430 Launchpad > http://www.43oh.com/2012/12/usb-v1-1-support-on-the-msp430-launchpad/ > >Hope this helps... Oh, yes. Added to my USB favorites folder. I'll look it over. Thanks. Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@technologyhighland.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-20 12:01 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <20121220120139.1de29d7e@rg.highlandtechnology.com> |
| In reply to | #10874 |
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:54:19 -0800 Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: > On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:00:28 -0600, Frnak McKenney > <frnak@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> wrote: > > >Plus two compiler/IDE suites plus the MSP430 port of gcc. > > Yes. I've been having almost nothing but trouble with IAR's > on my "clean" install of Win7 Ultimate 64-bit, though. I > don't know what the problem is, but I've tried it with many > different LaunchPads and different USB connectors (the > motherboard has a LOT of them) and I also tried doing it with > the XP 32-bit VM from Microsoft running underneath without > any better success (I didn't expect that to work, anyway.) On > the same system, CCS does just fine. Odd thing there, _if_ > both are using the same DLL (which maybe they are not.) > > On a Thinkpad laptop running Win7 Professional, though, IAR > works great. And on all my other machines, just fine. But > they aren't 64-bit installs. > I haven't tried it under Windows, but I just used the Linux version of mspgcc for a personal project, and was really impressed by how clean and easy it wound up being. You also need mspdebug if you're going to work with a LaunchPad, but once I got them installed things just did what they were supposed to. -- Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology -- www.highlandtechnology.com Email address domain is currently out of order. See above to fix.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-20 12:27 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <35t6d8p1ehgpt28u5jnq6i6qgfl9u922ep@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #10876 |
On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:01:39 -0800, Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@technologyhighland.invalid> wrote: >On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:54:19 -0800 >Jon Kirwan <jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:00:28 -0600, Frnak McKenney >> <frnak@far.from.the.madding.crowd.com> wrote: >> >> >Plus two compiler/IDE suites plus the MSP430 port of gcc. >> >> Yes. I've been having almost nothing but trouble with IAR's >> on my "clean" install of Win7 Ultimate 64-bit, though. I >> don't know what the problem is, but I've tried it with many >> different LaunchPads and different USB connectors (the >> motherboard has a LOT of them) and I also tried doing it with >> the XP 32-bit VM from Microsoft running underneath without >> any better success (I didn't expect that to work, anyway.) On >> the same system, CCS does just fine. Odd thing there, _if_ >> both are using the same DLL (which maybe they are not.) >> >> On a Thinkpad laptop running Win7 Professional, though, IAR >> works great. And on all my other machines, just fine. But >> they aren't 64-bit installs. > >I haven't tried it under Windows, but I just used the Linux version of >mspgcc for a personal project, and was really impressed by how clean >and easy it wound up being. You also need mspdebug if you're going to >work with a LaunchPad, but once I got them installed things just did >what they were supposed to. Wonderful to hear. That was next on my list to try out, as well. Good news! Thanks, Jon
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-14 17:53 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <kafp1t$79j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #10804 |
On 2012-12-14, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> writes: > > [...] > > > And frankly the use of RS-232/async ports should not be a first > > choice these days. > > Given the intended application, I tend to agree -- the use of > USB would probably simplify the things there a lot. > > Unfortunately, I'm yet to find a really cheap MCU (8-, 32-, or > perhaps even 16-bit) with an on-chip USB. (V-USB doesn't seem > to fit well, for its CDC-ACM capability is necessarily a hack.) > The best I've found so far are some STM32's for under $4. I'd > like to see if there could be anything else at half that price. > I am assuming you want USB device only. If you want USB host as well, try looking at the PIC32MX range to see if it's something that would match your requirements. Your previous postings imply that you are doing hobbyist type work and you don't say what packaging you need the device in so as much as it pains me :-), I am going to point you to the PIC18F range if you want it in PDIP. Start by looking at the PIC18F14K50. It's quite a limited device so you may need to look at the other options in the PIC18F range to see which of them also support USB device. > (Though USB identifiers may become an issue. They provide one > allowing for relatively unrestricted use with V-USB, but I don't > know what's the current practice for the MCU's with hardware USB > ports.) > Since I only use them for my own projects, I just make them up. Since no one else uses my embedded code, I also don't know what the current practice is short of having to pay for formally assigned identifiers. In the past I have heard of some manufacturers allowing you to use identifiers within a subset of the range assigned to the manufacturer, but I don't know what the current policy is. Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-15 01:26 +0700 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <86vcc4o5gb.fsf@gray.siamics.net> |
| In reply to | #10809 |
>>>>> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes: >>>>> On 2012-12-14, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> wrote: [...] >> Unfortunately, I'm yet to find a really cheap MCU (8-, 32-, or >> perhaps even 16-bit) with an on-chip USB. (V-USB doesn't seem to >> fit well, for its CDC-ACM capability is necessarily a hack.) The >> best I've found so far are some STM32's for under $4. I'd like to >> see if there could be anything else at half that price. > I am assuming you want USB device only. Yes. [...] > Your previous postings imply that you are doing hobbyist type work > and you don't say what packaging you need the device in so as much as > it pains me :-), I am going to point you to the PIC18F range if you > want it in PDIP. My guess is that anything with 0.8 mm or larger spacing will be just fine. 0.5 mm pitch feels a bit too fine to tackle for an amateur, but I'm yet to try it myself. > Start by looking at the PIC18F14K50. It's quite a limited device so > you may need to look at the other options in the PIC18F range to see > which of them also support USB device. ... As for the PIC's, given the sheer number of university courses built around these I've seen, I've always assumed there're something wrong with them. (Some of their "weak points" were referenced in recent CAE postings, BTW.) Anyway, is there a reason I'd choose this particular MCU over, say, STM32F103C8 (other than the package, which is the troubling 0.5 mm LQFP 48 for the latter, that is)? As for the cost, it seems to be > $5 a piece for the former vs. < $3 for the latter (for the smaller orders, e. g., a dozen or so.) >> (Though USB identifiers may become an issue. They provide one >> allowing for relatively unrestricted use with V-USB, but I don't >> know what's the current practice for the MCU's with hardware USB >> ports.) > Since I only use them for my own projects, I just make them up. Unfortunately, my ultimate intent is to share the designs with the community, and using a "made-up" identifiers doesn't seem like a particularly good example to teach on. [...] -- FSF associate member #7257
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-14 19:30 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <kafupe$dgs$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #10810 |
On 2012-12-14, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes: >>>>>> On 2012-12-14, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> wrote: > > [...] > > > Your previous postings imply that you are doing hobbyist type work > > and you don't say what packaging you need the device in so as much as > > it pains me :-), I am going to point you to the PIC18F range if you > > want it in PDIP. > > My guess is that anything with 0.8 mm or larger spacing will be > just fine. 0.5 mm pitch feels a bit too fine to tackle for an > amateur, but I'm yet to try it myself. > > > Start by looking at the PIC18F14K50. It's quite a limited device so > > you may need to look at the other options in the PIC18F range to see > > which of them also support USB device. > > ... As for the PIC's, given the sheer number of university > courses built around these I've seen, I've always assumed > there're something wrong with them. (Some of their "weak > points" were referenced in recent CAE postings, BTW.) > Yes, including by myself. :-) They do have a lousy architecture, but they are available in packages I am comfortable working with and they have USB device in those same packages which the other MCU architectures I prefer do not. > Anyway, is there a reason I'd choose this particular MCU over, > say, STM32F103C8 (other than the package, which is the troubling > 0.5 mm LQFP 48 for the latter, that is)? As for the cost, it > seems to be > $5 a piece for the former vs. < $3 for the latter > (for the smaller orders, e. g., a dozen or so.) > If you are comfortable working at something smaller than PDIP, then I cannot think of any reason to consider the 8-bit PICs in your case. BTW, at Farnell in the UK, they are charging just over 2 UKP per unit (well under 4 US$ at current exchange rates) for the PIC18F14K50 and I have always considered Farnell to be a bit more expensive than some others based on the prices I have paid for other products. The AT90USB162-16AU comes in a TQFP 0.8mm pitch package according to Atmel's summary PDF; the Farnell UK price seems reasonable at qty 10, but given what you have said above, I don't know what price your suppliers would charge for them however. Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-15 11:25 +0700 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <86mwxgndqe.fsf@gray.siamics.net> |
| In reply to | #10813 |
>>>>> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes: [...] > The AT90USB162-16AU comes in a TQFP 0.8mm pitch package according to > Atmel's summary PDF; the Farnell UK price seems reasonable at qty 10, As it seems, ATmega8U2/TQFP is available at the same price. Any specific reason to prefer one over the other? > but given what you have said above, I don't know what price your > suppliers would charge for them however. Well, Farnell may turn to be suitable, but I'm yet to check their shipping conditions. -- FSF associate member #7257
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-12-17 00:29 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: serial host-to-device communication in amateur designs |
| Message-ID | <kalp11$vdo$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #10820 |
On 2012-12-14, Ivan Shmakov <oneingray@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes: > > > The AT90USB162-16AU comes in a TQFP 0.8mm pitch package according to > > Atmel's summary PDF; the Farnell UK price seems reasonable at qty 10, > > As it seems, ATmega8U2/TQFP is available at the same price. Any > specific reason to prefer one over the other? > Sorry, but I have no experience with the USB capable AVRs. I only know about them because I have seen them mentioned while working with other AVRs. Simon. -- Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded
csiph-web