Altera HSMC connector

Hello all. I'm looking for some information about Altera's FPGA. I have
this Cyclone V GX dev board:
formatting link

It has a 160-pin HSMC connector, which connects using this flexible cable:
formatting link

formatting link

I'm wondering if this connector can be used for general purpose off-board
communication for custom uses outside of connecting to other Mezzanine
boards? Could I, for example, connect some wires to the pins and signal
them independently for GPIO?
Or... is this cable interface something proprietary that only allows
interconnect between Mezzanine devices?
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
Loading thread data ...
It's a bit of a pain as connectors go.
formatting link
makes a convenient breakout. You want the (M), to mate the dev kit, not the (F).
--
Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology -- www.highlandtechnology.com
 
Email address domain is currently out of order.  See above to fix.
Reply to
Rob Gaddi
Thank you, Rob. That's exactly what I was looking for.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
Ordered. Thank you again.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
I think you are better off not using the FPGA eval board and just making your own board with the 386 and the FPGA. The adapters and cables are going to add a lot of capacitance and noise to your signals. Why mess with the added complexity?
--

Rick
Reply to
rickman
Received. Fits the board like it was made for it. :-)
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
Received. Fits the board like it was made for it. :-)
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
You may need to slow down the Cyclone IO edges. If memory serves the V has sub ns rise times. Your cable and 386 input cap will help limit that some. Of course pay close attention to the setup and hold times the 386 is going to require.
At one time PLX had local bus to pci chips. I have not checked on them lately. They got bought by Avago some time back. They may only do PCIe now.
--
Chisolm 
Republic of Texas
Reply to
Joe Chisolm
I'm glad all the research effort I put in of looking over at the stack of same sitting on the corner of my desk and writing down the number from the box came in handy.
--
Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology -- www.highlandtechnology.com
 
Email address domain is currently out of order.  See above to fix.
Reply to
Rob Gaddi
You won't have trouble with lines that are essentially data lines, you don't care if they ring. The trouble will be with clock like lines. That will include the actual clock and potentially the read/write strobes depending on how you implement the interface circuit.
More importantly, you may have trouble with ground bounce. I've put my scope on the far end of disk drive ribbon cables before and the noise on the ground can be horrendous.
The issue is not the clock rate, it is the edge rate. You can configure the FPGA for slower edge rates, but you can't do anything about the 386 edge rates. Running 100+ signal lines over a ribbon cable is just not a good idea unless you use differential signalling. You may get away with it, you may not. Since you are building a custom board anyway, why not just include the FPGA?
The other way to do this is to use a set of bidirectional latches/buffers and let the FPGA access the interface via a simple serial interface using LVDS signalling. The FPGA already includes this functionallity. You just need to add a few interface chips to the 386 board along with your quickswitch devices.
--

Rick
Reply to
rickman
Me too! :-)
Nonetheless, and regardless of how trivial the effort was, it got me exactly what I needed, and it was/is appreciated.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
The board I intend to build will have three female mates to the three male GPIO interface ports on the HSMC adapter card. It will plug straight into it. No ribbon cables. Just a direct connection.
As I understand it, the level shifters will introduce a delay, which should not be an issue at much slower clock rates.
I do intend to build a direct coupling board. I could envision also a second FPGA on it for some purpose. Not sure what that would be, but I could see it.
BTW, my goals are not to have 30 year old technology, but rather to start somewhere. I am familiar with 386, it is ubiquitous, and it's easily extensible.
I look forward to LibSF 386-x40 coming to life.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
That's better, but the issue is as much the length as it is how the connection is made. I suppose there will be many ground connections on all of the sockets? Signal integrity is key.
If you use the quickswitch parts you get less than a nanosecond delay. They aren't buffers, they are transmission gates that limit the voltage range on the 3.3 volt side.
Lol, if you don't know the purpose, that's not very good vision. Try focusing on the things you can see clearly. Normally a goal is in mind, then the path is selected to reach a number of smaller goals on the way to the main goal. You seem to be plotting a path without clear objectives.
Good luck.
--

Rick
Reply to
rickman
I don't know the purpose because it's your suggestion. Mine is to use my dev board. It's been my plan all along. It's why I bought it, for my LibSF 386-x40 CPU design.
Ah:
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link

You seem to see things incorrectly, and always disparaging toward me.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
Assuming this is the standard Altera/Terasic 40 way pinout, there aren't. There's two ground, one 3.3V and one 5V per socket, at roughly 1/3 2/3 positioning. The rest is GPIO. You might get away with purposefully grounding some GPIOs at the other end, but if Rick needs ~100 IOs there aren't many to play with. Each socket has (if I remember) 34 I/Os and two clock inputs.
On the other hand, we get away with driving 40MHz video signals over ribbon cable with that connector so there is some leeway. YMMV of course.
Theo
Reply to
Theo Markettos
That's the second time you have indicated you don't appreciate my comments. I will refrain from posting.
--

Rick
Reply to
rickman
My loss.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
I need 92 GPIO pins. The remaining 40 are Vcc, Vss, or not connected.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin
I began studying the 80386 data sheets last night. There are only 19 control pins which will be used in a 32-bit bus implementation that does not support address pipelining. And only 16 if a math-coprocessor is not used. And only 14 if there isn't an arbitrated system bus. The rest are 30 address pins, 32 data pins, and either Vcc, Vss, or not connected.
Of those 14 pins:
1 is the clock signal
4 are address byte enablers (32-bit writes, 1 pin per byte to read 8-bit, 16-bit, 24-bit, or 32-bit)
4 define the bus cycle definition 2 defines the bus control operation
2 define interrupt, non-maskable interrupt
1 is reset
It is an incredibly simple design. The Intel 80386 manuals also define timing for their 20 MHz to 33 MHz parts. I'm assuming the Am386 would follow similar protocols.
Edge timing appears to be 4 ns, so that will need slowed. The rest would seem to fall within the clock cycle timing, but requires a certain amount of time to pass before the data on the pins is valid, typically in 20 or less ns, and often 4, 6, or 7 or more ns.
Best regards, Rick C. Hodgin
Reply to
Rick C. Hodgin

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.