PSoC Express: Does it work for semi-analog designs?

Hey, we aren't slave drivers out here. None of the companies I've worked with uses child labor and they are run with western-style clean rooms. Top notch.

Often their own and that won't help you. But I've got one that does take outside orders and might be interesting for you if the volume isn't a bazillion per month. Well, maybe even then. I occasionally see some assembly samples from them and it's quite impressivbe. Do you have an email address other than hotmail? Then I'll send the contact info to you.

On a side note: Many companies over there can't easily be reached via Internet right now including the one mentioned above. The earth quake in Taiwan has ripped some undersea fibers. A ship from Tyco is on the way but it might take a few days until connections improve.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg
Loading thread data ...

We have usually tried not to use any exotic on-chip peripherals. If you do you may get pretty much stuck with one manufacturer, even in the 8051 world. Don't expect total compatibility but what can be done is, for example, to provide two footprints.

Not a real issue. Chip mfgs know that unless you are really pushing the envelope for a certain process you could jump ship any time. So the pricing there is more stable and low. Also, the main reason for 2nd sourcing in off-the-shelf parts is mitigation of the risk of delivery problems. IOW those dreaded allocation siuations. It's less of an issue with custom chips because you commit to a certain number of wafers per delivery and so does the manufacturer. Those schedules are often mapped out over more than one year. Other than technical problems such as a process gone astray I have never seen much in delivery problems.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

I don't think so. The ARM is a very old idea and all the chips gone custom. Later there was a market opening for some more generic versions, e.g. LPC210x to replace typical 8051.

That is the generic anwser: Don't use much or special of chip functions.

The only versions I know of are type number 8051 and 80C154.

Chip manufacturers typical make the chip production in hugh volume at one time and store the wafers for later assembling depending on market needs later. The wafers don't need much space.

- Henry

--

formatting link

Reply to
Henry Kiefer

See, you've just described the problem by calling ARM "old". In my line of work I can't use stuff that becomes "old" after 10-15 years and then slowly disappears. I need parts that remain popular and in production for several decades :-)

[...]
--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

custom.

Old means here stabilized.

No one can foresee the future. But as out of my experience the ARM architecture will drive at least the next 20 years and will completely replace (almost) all 8051. It is a very effective system - both technical and in the market. One problem all high-speed cores with Flash have is the problem how to get code/data fast enough out of the Flash. See for example how Philips that handles in the LPC210x. The logical answer was to compress code: That is the M3 Cortex. Besides that there is more space in Flash -> cheaper.

Several decades - good joke!! Have a good rutsch :-)

- Henry

--

formatting link

Reply to
Henry Kiefer

With the enourmous amount of ARM based controllers available these days having two footprints could be an option. I think it is possible to have one piece of firmware run on different ARM based microcontrollers.

--
Reply to nico@nctdevpuntnl (punt=.)
Bedrijven en winkels vindt U op www.adresboekje.nl
Reply to
Nico Coesel
[...]

Not a joke at all. I am still designing with the CD4000 series and probably will be for a long time. Those are from the 70's when the Beatles were playing on the radio all day. Then there is the 2N3904 which is a lot older.

Have a good rutsch :-)

Same to you. We'll do fondue with a few friend here at our house.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

I don't get what you are saying. The various ARM chips have custom peripherals, but they all have the same CPU and instruction set.

I see two ways "second source" has utility. The first is true "second source" that allows you to use any of several suppliers without changing a thing in your design. Aside from a very limited subset of the available 8051 chips, this is just not an option. The other is to be able to write code that is enough removed from the hardware, that a different board layout will let you use any of several parts. This is very useful to get the best price possible even after you are in production.

The first approach limits you to a very few of the least powerful MCU devices available in a common footprint. The second approach allows you to use many vendors of ARM MCUs and in some cases where you are careful to avoid *any* hardware dependancies, you can even swap different CPUs.

BTW, what is "generic" about the LPC210x?

But then you lose a lot of capability and have to rely on external hardware or use a lot more software and CPU time. Often this is not only expensive in terms of CPU time but also power consumption.

I guess there are some uses for ancient devices just for longevity, but it has got to be an extreme example to limit a design in so many ways.

Reply to
rickman

rickman wrote: # So now they have a tool that they can claim eliminates writing code. I # have only seen that once before in my career and that was a full page # ad in Byte magazine some 20+ years ago. I never saw anything further # from that company. :^)

:)

# I have been pursuing info on the new PSOC3 chips and I am pretty sure I # have the straight scoop on it now. They will be coming out with two # new PSOC3 lines, one with an 8051 type CPU and one with an ARM # Cortex-M3 CPU.

Interesting - seems Cypress have not bought into the "Cortex M3 replacing 8 bit uC" spin, from ARM :) Cypress doing this sounds more similar to Freescale's push, which is more than one core choice, but more common peripherals.

# Both lines will have the new, NEA (no excuses analog) # programmable blocks.

Oh dear, who makes up these names. Last time I looked at a PSoC analog block, it really did look like an Analog bock done in a digital process : a long way from high performance Analog. I prefer my Analog Blocks to be fully specified, - the buck has to stop somewhere, and names like NEA sound like the triumph of optimisim over experience

# I hope they can also improve on the digital # blocks. I have a small, 10 input multiplexer that I would like to # implement in the PSOC instead of having to add a CPLD. But the current # PSOC can't really do this.

CPLD + uC is a tough target. The uPSDs have this, and there was talk of a 32 MCell CPLD variant, but that never appeared, and they offer versions spec'd with NO cpld at all, to avoid scaring off users who do not want to use a CPLD.

# Don't hold your breath for the PSOC3 parts. They are still banging on # the keyboard writing the upfront documentation, so samples may be # available a year from now.

That's a long way out. Freescale will have their Simplified Coldfire by then, and maybe SiLabs will have entered the 32 bit realm by then as well.

-jg

Reply to
-jg

Lets look at the shotsky affect from the transmittent transformers before going into the next level of transievers where pre and post layout has already been done if the engineering is correct. Whereby the second level of transister layou takes on the second layer effect. Affecting the transister receiving the emination. Light emmitting diodes are the first link in verification and monitoring.

*frequency *occurance *reliability *monitoring *troubleshooting and analysis of circuit pathways should be monitored for farad wavelengths and implications. Let us stick with late 60's design before exploring current and ongoing advances in the industry. Analog to digital will complicate todays discoveries. We still are developing circuits we don't know that work as much as how they work. Digital is an '80s phenomenom. Some circuitry are obsoleted in 2000 using 1940's technology. Remember electricity is still infantily new. Many "U" chips are still not on NASA's reliability charts.
Reply to
Bitznpeezs

Ok, guys, I went to the seminar today. Very well done, four attendants including me, plus two engineers from Cypress and two from Arrow. That meant we could get all our questions answered. Simple designs that usually take a half hour or more to code could be entered in minutes. It was a hands-on session where everyone brought their laptops and actually did some code. Bottomline I think PSoC Express is definitely worth a good look.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

I think you mean "attendees". It took me a minute to figure out that you didn't mean four nubile houris ministering to your needs. ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Reply to
Rich Grise

Hi Joerg, Can you elaborate with the corner points - ie where does this higher level entry, run out of steam ? What is it good for, and where should you avoid using it ?. Did they mention the ARM PSoC ?

I've used the SiLabs forms entry system for peripheral config, and that is definitely a time, and error, saver

-jg

Reply to
-jg

Yep. Sorry.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

We didn't get to that in too much detail. Partly because we all came from very different walks of EE life but mostly because it was a hands-on session and they wanted us all to take the wheel and drive it through 4-5 projects. Measure a potmeter value, process it, send it via I2C to another proto kit part, then via USB into Hyperterminal, and so on. Pretty cool. In a mere 10 minutes you could code a bidirectional I2C to USB converter that actually worked right there in the conference room.

After I asked that very same question the presenter said that you can always port your design into PSoC Designer if you find you run out of control options, and you may often have to. That allows to check how much MIPS and other resources you have left (Express does not, yet). This also allows you to add tricky or timing-critical stuff but once you have touched and changed it with PSoC Designer you cannot port it back to Express anymore.

To me (not a code expert) it looks like PSoC Express is useful when the design requirements can mostly be fulfilled with the included "modules in a can" plus a few more of less complicated formulas for transfer functions. Also for state machines that aren't too time critical.

An example where it saves time: Let's say you never coded a stage with hysteresis because there was no need. So you don't have a "canned" C-routine yet. Express let's you do that by dragging an input module onto the screen, right clicking on it and specifying the hysteresis. No need to write one line of code. Just what us analog dudes need :-)

Yes. So far the Cypress weather forecast indicates that we'll see ARM end of 2007. Also, the wireless range (PRoC) is supposed to be expanded. That would be cool.

Also, it's usually nicely documented. In a way that non-coders can understand.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

Annoying to see how fast you can change your mind ;-)

Yes, you can import Express projects into Designer but then you need the extra-cost C Compiler license too! I don't know if it is possible to let the code alone and add prog code simply in Assembler only - to save the money for the compiler. Personally I use a mix of Assembler for interrupts and C for the rest.

There are templates for all ready-to-use modules in Designer to change the standard/startup behaviour of a module. Later on all values can be changed at run-time in your program.

- Henry

--

formatting link

"Joerg" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:b9Qph.19213$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...

Reply to
Henry Kiefer

Nope, probably I am going to remain mostly analog. Even at 75c it is often very hard to justify a PSoC when analog parts can do the same job for half. But I want to be prepared when the prices come down a bit one day, plus for cases where I'd be dealing with highly non-linear control loops again. Those are tough in analog. What I liked about Express is that it lets us analog guys produce some decent code, and fast ;-)

They gave each participant an Imagecraft C-license for Designer. Should have gone to the seminar 8-)

That's what I'll have to figure out next, whether it is possible to make your own templates. Or in old CAD speak a personal library.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

Hello Henry,

Just FYI: There are still three seminars in Finland end of January. But I guess it'll be freezing out there...

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com
Reply to
Joerg

Yes. If you think "analog" then Express is the way you can walk easy.

I heart that Cypress cuts the price "as needed" for devices selled into asian markets.

the

money

Be lucky :-)

the

changed

The templates are loaded if you add a module of your choice. Then you click the values in the fields. That gives you the boot-file automatically generated which loads the PSoC Cypress-provided on-chip firmware after reset to configure the on-chip peripherals. Also in the modules is ready-to-use software included.

For example to add a handy debug TxD:

  1. Open Designer
  2. Select the TxD module out of the module list
  3. place it somewhere. Or just use "place" and let Designer take a free a place.
  4. Set the module template values: Baudrate etc.
  5. Copy simple sample c code from module description in your main.c code
  6. Add a little code to do something with the sample code. A text string or such to send. For ease they provide a CRLF function. Of course you can write your own.
  7. Don't forget to select an output pin for TxD.
8 And now the fun part: By selecting TxD line "direct" or "inverted" in the connection matrix between TxD module and pin you can configure your hardware having a (inverted) MAX232 or just straight-line TxD output to the PC serial.

Work is done in one minute. OK, the first time maybe 10 minutes to find especially how the matrix works.

  1. Compile and load the hex-file in the PSoC device.

You see, that is not the same as your mentioned CAD template I guess. You can clone projects. Or even change the underlying PSoC device selection and the Designer will change the project approbiate. Mixing Assembler and C is no problem.

Be aware that several module descriptions contain errors or hide things needed.

- Henry

--

formatting link

Reply to
Henry Kiefer

Even on the "Ostfront" of Germany there is much space left till Finland :-) And we have +10°C degress (Not fahrenheit!). No snow here. Kids are not lucky. January 2006 we had below -20°C and I frozen some of my fingers seriously doing a stupid night walk. Cribbled several months...

But thanks!

- Henry

--

formatting link

"Joerg" schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:lEVph.58404$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...

Reply to
Henry Kiefer

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.