Lattice Announces EOL for XP and EC/P Product Lines

I went to the Cypress web site and I can't find a data sheet on their PSOC parts. They also encrypt the info on the broad classes of devices behind marketing speak. So I can't even get a feel for what they are capable of.

Most recent parts from Xilinx including Spartan 3A have SPI master mode configuration, requiring nothing extra over the SPI flash itself and a handful of resistors. Indirect SPI flash programming over JTAG is supported by Impact, and you can generate SVF files to do the programming with an embedded processor. Also because the pins used for SPI config become I/O after config, you can use the SPI flash in your design, and possibly come up with a more "native" solution to field updates (without using JTAG).

I'm not sure what the use of Impact implies. Does that mean connecting a PC with a dongle cable? That would be used in the factory perhaps, but in the field they want to use an CPU to drive the JTAG signals. They have that working for an Altera part, but not yet for the Lattice part and of course not for any Xilinx parts.

Yes, you certainly can do that, and Xilinx has some articles on how to write your computer code to take a .bit file loaded into a processor's EPROM and perform the various modes of download available. There is serial config, parallel config, JTAG config, etc. To do this from a CPU, you want slave mode, where the CPU clocks the bits into the FPGA. For a serial EPROM chip you select master serial, so the FPGA generates the bit clock. The newer FPGAs have almost too MANY modes of configuration.

Jon

Rick... I check the Actel/Microsemi lead you started down on the original p ost, they have options available in your target size, 100 pin QFP, are flas h based/reprogrammable over JTAG and I think should have very similar power requirements to your original design. I am looking at this chip, availabl e today on digikey: AGL250V2-VQG100, 14 mm2, $25.40, 68 I/O and a fair amou nt of logic. If you don't need that much logic and want a cheaper part the y go down from there in the same package.

We've got a quote for the Microsemi SF2 M2S010 (without T) somewhere in the middle of that price difference in low volume. The features of SF2 somehow justified the additional price because we could avoid a separate flash and MCU externally. The flexibility in configuration of the FPGA and MSS and h ard preipherals also give us design freedom. Low power consumption was defi nitively something worth a bit extra.

Yes, each project has its own requirements so some will justify a higher price for the improved integration. I am not so familiar with the Microsemi part and I not had time to dig into their offerings. I don't even know if they have anything new in the last year or two.

The main stumbling block for the Cypress part is the lack of CD quality CODEC I believe. But that is only a $3 part at most. There are also some op amps on the board which I doubt can be replaced since at least four of them are used to drive a 12 volt supply into a 50 ohm load (8 Vp-p IIRC). The remaining parts are analog switches on the analog I/O, analog switches on the digital I/O to act as 5-3 volt level converters and a two channel RS-422 input/output chip. I doubt any of this can be pulled into the Microsemi part leaving us with this possibly replacing the existing FPGA and the CODEC at best. So it would be hard to justify replacing what is otherwise $15 worth of parts with a $30 part if I read your post correctly. By low volume I assume you mean qty 100 ball park.

Funny about Cypress. I seem to recall their web site having gone downhill over the last few years. When I tried to download a data sheet on their parts I couldn't find one! They have links for their software and for samples, but none for a data sheet!!!? Maybe it is embedded in their development software? They also give a crappy overview of their parts. So far I haven't figured it out but I guess it is worth a second try.

I think what you are describing is rather different. This is the slave serial config mode which is somewhat limited in functionality. The interface my customer has provided is intended to use a JTAG interface. In the case of the serial EEPROM the CPU would either program the EEPROM directly or drive the JTAG on the FPGA to program the EEPROM.

I'm pretty sure the customer does *not* want to load the part every time it is booted, just once in a programming mode, then the board loads itself when it boots up. I'm not sure if this is what you were describing or not.

The data sheet lists Spartan3 200AN and 50AN parts with VQ100 package and 68 user I/Os. Might be those packages are EOL though.

I had a chance to look at the Smart Fusion 2 devices, and they seem to be too much device for this project. The M2S005 would likely be a good fit with a lot more logic than needed, but the smallest package it comes in is a fine pitch BGA with 400 pins! I guess they are targeting much larger apps than mine.

I still need to take a better look at the Cypress parts if I can figure out how to get a data sheet.

Rick,

It seems to me that you have changed your goals around a bit and it is not clear to me exactly what you are looking for anymore but from what I can ga ther I still think you are missing out on a decent choice if you are ignori ng the actel/microsemi igloo parts. Take another look at the agl250 line. If you need the smaller quad flat pack it is there, I would imagine there is plenty of logic for your existing product and it is inexpensive. They h ave a chip in the same package with a cortex m1 if you want an embedded uC too.

I personally prefer to design with Xilinx first then altera then actel but will definitely go with actel when the design needs it, they just tend to r un a bit slower than what I like. I have looked at using the cypress chips before for the USB capability back around 2005 but was not able to get the windows side working right with the jungo driver so went with the USB to u art parts from ftdi instead. Never looked back to cypress or jungo since t hen.

The goal is to live a rich, full life... ;) There are any number of ways to do that.

I have gone through all the major FPGA makers, including MicroSemi and created a spread sheet of the devices which might substitute for the Lattice part that has been discontinued. I may have given the Igloo parts short shrift because I seem to recall they use Versa tiles for both logic an FFs, so you need twice as many if you need both FFs and 4 input LUTs. The Lattice FPGA being replaced has some 3000 LUTs and 3000 FFs, IIRC so the AGLN250 might suit the requirement. It would be nicer if the new device offered some new capability such as more logic and/or multipliers. So I should at least include this part in my selection even if it does not provide any new capabilities.

As to my seeming switching of requirements, we *have* to replace the FPGA. There is also a CODEC from AKM on the board which could be hard to replace should it also go obsolete. It is just as old as the FPGA and I have no insight about when AKM might obsolete it. Everything else on the board is second sourced. So if we are building a new model, I want to have a plan for providing some assurance the CODEC won't cause another redesign in a couple of years.

One way of doing this is to combine the CODEC function with the FPGA (hence looking at the Microsemi MCU/FPGA device which turns out to be rather pricey) or possibly use an MCU (with adequate analog I/O) and a smaller FPGA. Only a portion of the current FPGA design has to be in an FPGA, most of it is slow logic can be turned into software.

SiLabs seems to make an 8051 type chip with 16 bit ADCs and fast 12 bit DACs. I might be able to dither the DACs to provide higher resolution on the output. I need to also look at Cirrus Logic. I seem to recall they make some parts that might work. Its hard because of the limited board space, but two smaller devices might actually take up less board space than one large one. Providing a 5 volt tolerant interface would also eliminate some other chips and free up more board space.

Both ADI and TI have DSP/CODEC devices, but they aren't designed for general purpose programming and just don't suit the need.

Well I am jealous that sounds like a fun project. One other thing that cam e to mind as this was going through my head today was the fpslic from atmel , we looked at using one a while back but ultimately decided on splitting t he design into a cpld (coolrunner) and an atmega128.

Best of luck and let me know what you decide on, it is interesting to me.

Wow! I had no idea they still made the FPSLIC. That is *very* long in the tooth and I believe it never had much market penetration so that I expect many potential users were put off thinking it would be scrapped. Actually, if we had any assurance that would be made for the next 5-10 years, it likely could be a perfect fit. IIRC it had an AVR CPU and some amount of the LUT based Atmel FPGA fabric. That would do a great job of offloading the FPGA fabric with the AVR and likely is 5 volt compatible so potentially saving some chips. But I'm pretty sure this is not well supported and likely to be dumped any time. It's what, at least 10 years old, maybe 15.

Heck, if the sky were the limit, I think this design could be done in the GA144, a multiprocessor chip which I think is more like an FPGA with processors in place of LUTs (I call it a FPPA, Field Programmable Processor Array). But the company making them is very small and I doubt they will be around in five years.

As to the "fun" aspect, yes, it is a bit of fun, but this is not a salaried job, this is my *business*, so the seriousness takes away a lot of the "fun". I need to impress the customer that I can give them a new design that will last for at least 5 years and I would like to provide them potential for new applications.

Ok, I finally figured it out. Sometimes I am a little slow. The AGL parts are just Igloo which is combined on a web page with the IGLOOe parts. The link said IGLOO/e which made me think it was just the e parts with the ARM M1 core enabled and I kept skipping that one.

Still, I find the parts to be a bit confusing. I'm not certain what the difference between the IGLOO and the IGLOOnano is. It appears the nano is slightly lower power, but I don't see just how much lower. The IGLOO parts seem to come in an M1 version even without the 'e'. In fact the lowest cost part in the AGL250 flavor (RoHS) is the M1 version! Not sure just what that even means.

I think my main concern is that these parts are long in the tooth, but I'll add them to my spread sheet since they are the only ones that can fit the board without adding parts or going to a much tougher footprint to use.

Someone mentioned Altera has a new family coming shortly, above the MAX V, which is looking backward next to Lattice. So you could push them for more info on what packages/sizes they plan ?

-jg

Funny, I shot an email to my favorite distie and I was eventually connected with an FAE. He is new to the company and indicated he would be digging up an NDA to sign. I was a bit puzzled by this, it has been a while since I was asked to sign an NDA to hear about new products. I didn't hear back after a few days I called him. He was rather surprised I was asking about the new line and asked how I even knew about it. I told him I didn't know much other than it was a follow on to the Max V and was pretty new. Seems it is so new that Altera hasn't spoken about it other than under NDA, lol.

What I did get out of him was that currently they are pushing out a new Stradix line IIRC and that would occupy them for most of 2014. If they wouldn't have the Max V follow on in production until 2015 that is a bit long for me to hold my breath. So I'm moving on... and I guess we aren't doing the NDA... that's what I am required to say, lol

But at least Altera hasn't abandoned the Flash based logic area like Xilinx. I like Lattice, but I'd hate for them to be the last man standing in Flash FPGAs, well, other than MicroSemi assuming you count them as being in the FPGA business. Just kidding... ;)

Rick,

You might add MicroSemi Igloo2 to your list as well. A SmartFusion2 without the ARM, but still has the other hard-silicon interfaces.

Andy

Yes, I've taken a look at the MicroSemi parts, but they suffer the same problems as the others. The favorable 100 pin QFP is not used in the Igloo2 line and the Igloo line is rather long in the tooth. It also is hard to get now, I see very little inventory at Digikey and a lead time query says "Unable to get lead time".

If the prices on the SmartFusion lines weren't so high I'd consider them, but they are pretty high for this design and they only come in rather large packages.