Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs?

From	David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups	comp.arch.embedded
Subject	Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs?
Date	2022-12-23 09:38 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<to3pd8$1lrb0$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<c0dc506e-e26c-4629-8971-65432f8dcf15n@googlegroups.com> <to1mha$1cndn$1@dont-email.me> <to1uj8$75d$1@reader2.panix.com> <to2g9j$1f3ks$3@dont-email.me> <to30tr$2j$1@reader2.panix.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 23/12/2022 02:40, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2022-12-22, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>> On 22/12/2022 16:54, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> On 2022-12-22, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You are maybe thinking of the TMS320F family of DSP/MCU's from TI.
>>>> These have a traditional DSP-style processor core - 16-bit "char"
>>>> (no 8-bit byte access at all), gruesome assembly where each
>>>> instruction does several different things in a single cycle,
>>>> multiple memory buses for simultaneous accesses, hardware support
>>>> for cyclic buffers, FFT twiddling, etc.
>>>
>>> IIRC, branches were also delayed.
>>
>> If you say so - I don't remember.  (Delayed branches are not uncommon in
>> processors designed for single-cycle instruction throughput - they are
>> also found in several RISC architectures.)
>>
>>> The later 320's (C30/C40 and on) were all 32-bit (in C: char, int,
>>> long int, float, double were all "one byte" which contained
>>> 32-bits). And the floating point format wasn't IEEE.
>>
>> I did not know they were part of the TMS320F family, though I know Texas
>> Instruments made other DSP's with 32-bit "char".
> 
> Ah, I overlooked the "F" in your original post. I don't remember any F
> parts. Interestingly the Wikipedia page on TMS320 doesn't mention the
> F parts at all. I did find this page abouit the TMS320F28335, but it's
> a 32-bit part also:
> 
>     https://www.ti.com/product/TMS320F28335
> 

I think the "F" part might just have meant "flash".  It was long ago 
when I used the part, so I suppose they have expanded to 32-bit since then.

Thread

DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-12-21 09:30 -0800
  Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-22 14:36 +0100
    Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2022-12-22 15:54 +0000
      Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-22 21:56 +0100
        Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2022-12-23 01:40 +0000
          Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-23 09:38 +0100
    Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2022-12-22 19:45 +0200
      Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 11:57 -0800
        Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2022-12-22 22:24 +0200
        Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-22 22:03 +0100
          Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-12-22 17:11 -0800
            Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-23 10:48 +0100
              Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 03:44 -0800
        Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2022-12-22 22:31 -0800
          Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2022-12-23 00:14 -0800
            Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-12-23 10:54 +0100
              Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2023-01-17 12:15 +1100
  Re: DSP like MCUs, or MCU like DSPs? dalai lamah <antonio12358@hotmail.com> - 2022-12-23 15:07 +0100

csiph-web