68HC1 | 812A4 | 9S12DP256 | Bootloader | CodeWarrior | D60A | Debugger | DP256 | ECT | EEPROM | EVB | Flash | HC1 | HCS12 | I2C | IAR | ICC1 | Interrupts | LCD | M68KIT912DP256 | MC9S12DP256 | MC9S12DP256B | Metrowerks | Motor | MSCAN | Multilink | PLL | Quadrature | SDI | SPI | Transceiver | XFC

I have CW12 v 3.1 with the default 32Kb compiler license.

when I compile the application in NE64OpenTCPforCW31_090104g I get a s19 file thats 62KB.
In the project window after everything is compiled I get totals: 60 files , 40K code, 9K data.
How is this possible?

I know its a 32K license because if I enable debug in the OpenTCP library code, I get an compiler error saying not allowed to compile code more than 32K

any idea?
BTW does freescale offer a 64K eval/demo version of CW12? Their website keeps sending me a link for the 32K license if I hit the demo link. --
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2499369
Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 01:23:19PM -0800, kbu (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
>
> I have CW12 v 3.1 with the default 32Kb compiler license.
>
> when I compile the application in NE64OpenTCPforCW31_090104g I get a
> s19 file thats 62KB. In the project window after everything is
> compiled I get totals: 60 files , 40K code, 9K data. How is this
> possible?

The .s19 file is in ASCII hex so its at least twice the size of the
binary.

You use Windows and other Microsoft products and wonder how 40k can be
less than 32k? :-)

My 37k OpenTCP project briefly flashes a message stating its loading 26k
into the target via P&E USB Multilink. Am guessing that is the real
answer minus ANSI library modules which I do not use.

> I know its a 32K license because if I enable debug in the OpenTCP
> library code, I get an compiler error saying not allowed to compile
> code more than 32K

090104g compiles and runs on DEMO9S12NE64 under the 32k license.
FSOTCP_1-0 is incomplete and has corrupt binary CW project file(s).
NE64_Vend_OpenTCP may not fit in even 64k.

Contrary to its name, OpenTCP isn't. This email list is the closest
thing to "open support" for OpenTCP. Viola pulled their broken
porn-riddled forum at http://www.opentcp.org/. Be sure to study the BUGS
on SourceForge.net:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=119500&atid=684216

> BTW does freescale offer a 64K eval/demo version of CW12? Their
> website keeps sending me a link for the 32K license if I hit the demo
> link.

I had a 30 day license. Arrived via email along with my 32k "permanent"
license upon registration. Originally installed that license by mistake
then removed it so as not to become dependent on expensive features I
neither wanted nor needed.

Before you get too deep into a new design note "Not Recommended for New
Design" at the bottom of the page at
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100

--
David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@dkel...
========================================================================
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.



______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> when I compile the application in NE64OpenTCPforCW31_090104g I get a s19 file thats 62KB.
> In the project window after everything is compiled I get totals: 60 files , 40K code, 9K data.
> How is this possible?

s19 file size doesn't equal real code size. Divide s19 file size by two
(single byte = 2 hex chars), subtract some for line overhead (header,
address, byte count, sum), then you get real code size.
But: if you have 40k code (let's even leave 9k data alone for now), that
should result in more than 80kB of s19 file, so something is wrong here.

--
Michal Konieczny
mk@mk@....





(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> Before you get too deep into a new design note "Not Recommended for New
> Design" at the bottom of the page at
> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100

WHAT'S THIS ?

I've just put few devices based on NE64 into production. It was about 3
or 4 months ago when we asked our local Freescale distributor about NE64
status and availability, and the answer was "don't worry".
Now I see that perhaps I should worry ?
There are few folks direcly from Freescale reading this list, maybe we
could get some "official" statement in this case ?
And Freescale's www page, section for 16-bit MCUs: "featured tools:
MC9S12NE64 Demonstration Board". Sale or something ? I'm somewhat lost.

--
Michal Konieczny
mk@mk@....





(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I is amazing how hard has been getting information of HCS12 micros, I selected this micro from the 56800 because I though there was more info available but I think I was wrong, It seems to me that all the detailed HCS12 info is available in those expensive books.

am I right or it is that I have not searched well. I have spent hours searching at the freescale web page and I havent found complete info. all I found are small documents that contain pieces of info and a number of links to book sales that overpases the 90 USD.

If I am not wrong, I would appreciate that at least somebody suggest me a good expensive book.

Thanks
Fausto ---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands ASAP.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Guillermo Jasso Nuez wrote this message on Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 16:42 -0800:
> I is amazing how hard has been getting information of HCS12 micros, I selected this micro from the 56800 because I though there was more info available but I think I was wrong, It seems to me that all the detailed HCS12 info is available in those expensive books.
>
> am I right or it is that I have not searched well. I have spent hours searching at the freescale web page and I havent found complete info. all I found are small documents that contain pieces of info and a number of links to book sales that overpases the 90 USD.
>
> If I am not wrong, I would appreciate that at least somebody suggest me a good expensive book.

I've gotten all the info I need on the HCS12 chip I am using as free
pdf downloads off FreeScale's website.. What chip are you looking at
using? or is that the problem? you don't know what chip to use?

--
John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579

"All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not."



______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Jan 20, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Michal Konieczny wrote:

>> Before you get too deep into a new design note "Not Recommended
>> for New
>> Design" at the bottom of the page at
>> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?
>> code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100
>
> WHAT'S THIS ?
>
> I've just put few devices based on NE64 into production. It was
> about 3
> or 4 months ago when we asked our local Freescale distributor about
> NE64
> status and availability, and the answer was "don't worry".
> Now I see that perhaps I should worry ?

Define, "worry"? :-)

I too would not have selected the NE64 for a new design back in
September had I known come January the part would start its End Of
Life cycle. Is likely the part will continue to be available for 4 or
5 years. But my HC11 design from 1994 is still in production,
unchanged, at the same modest annual volume it has been built every
year since.

Knew the NE64 was a dead end in the evolutionary path when I selected
it. But with this latest development odds are just as soon as my NE64
project ships I'll turn around and redo it using an Atmel
AT91SAM7X256/128 which was my original preference (but not yet
available). I'll be happy to leave OpenTCP behind.

--
David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@dkel...
========================================================================
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Already End of life.. that really SUCKS.. when I was seeing this 2 months back I knew it was the only HCS12 with these features but no one (from freescale) said anything about EOL...

Are there any alternatives for single chip integrated MAC/PHY + 16 or 32 bit processors ? There seem to be many MCU+MAC but no phy, and in my case the hassle of getting a board designed for the phy circuit is quite a pain.

Yes this whole freescale's hype and lack of good support (i.e. responses to queries, broken Opentcp etc) is really dissapointing.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2503864
Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "kbu (sent by Nabble.com)" <lists@n...>
wrote:
> [...]I knew it was the only HCS12 with these features but no one (from
> freescale) said anything about EOL...

Sure they have. Remember the discussions here, about ColdFire being
the intended replacement? They were developing some less expensive
32-bit (I don't remember if target was $2 or what) to replace function
of the NE64, and they just haven't released them yet. Based on past
experience, this won't work out great for us small customers, but at
least I could almost bet those ColdFire will be released in the next
couple of months.


______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Kelly" <dkelly@dkel...>
To: <68HC12@68HC...>
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [68HC12] confused about code size (CW12 - 3.1) > On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 01:23:19PM -0800, kbu (sent by Nabble.com) wrote:
>>
>> I have CW12 v 3.1 with the default 32Kb compiler license.
>>
>> when I compile the application in NE64OpenTCPforCW31_090104g I get a
>> s19 file thats 62KB. In the project window after everything is
>> compiled I get totals: 60 files , 40K code, 9K data. How is this
>> possible?
>
> The .s19 file is in ASCII hex so its at least twice the size of the
> binary.
>
> You use Windows and other Microsoft products and wonder how 40k can be
> less than 32k? :-)
>
> My 37k OpenTCP project briefly flashes a message stating its loading 26k
> into the target via P&E USB Multilink. Am guessing that is the real
> answer minus ANSI library modules which I do not use.
>
>> I know its a 32K license because if I enable debug in the OpenTCP
>> library code, I get an compiler error saying not allowed to compile
>> code more than 32K
>
> 090104g compiles and runs on DEMO9S12NE64 under the 32k license.
> FSOTCP_1-0 is incomplete and has corrupt binary CW project file(s).
> NE64_Vend_OpenTCP may not fit in even 64k.
>
> Contrary to its name, OpenTCP isn't. This email list is the closest
> thing to "open support" for OpenTCP. Viola pulled their broken
> porn-riddled forum at http://www.opentcp.org/. Be sure to study the BUGS
> on SourceForge.net:
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=119500&atid=684216
>
>> BTW does freescale offer a 64K eval/demo version of CW12? Their
>> website keeps sending me a link for the 32K license if I hit the demo
>> link.
>
> I had a 30 day license. Arrived via email along with my 32k "permanent"
> license upon registration. Originally installed that license by mistake
> then removed it so as not to become dependent on expensive features I
> neither wanted nor needed.
>
> Before you get too deep into a new design note "Not Recommended for New
> Design" at the bottom of the page at
> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100
>
> --
> David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@dkel...
> ========================================================================
> Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. >
> Yahoo! Groups Links




(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michal Konieczny" <0xmk@0xmk...>
To: <68HC12@68HC...>
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [68HC12] confused about code size (CW12 - 3.1) >> Before you get too deep into a new design note "Not Recommended for New
>> Design" at the bottom of the page at
>> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100
>
> WHAT'S THIS ?
>
> I've just put few devices based on NE64 into production. It was about 3
> or 4 months ago when we asked our local Freescale distributor about NE64
> status and availability, and the answer was "don't worry".
> Now I see that perhaps I should worry ?
> There are few folks direcly from Freescale reading this list, maybe we
> could get some "official" statement in this case ?
> And Freescale's www page, section for 16-bit MCUs: "featured tools:
> MC9S12NE64 Demonstration Board". Sale or something ? I'm somewhat lost.
>
> --
> Michal Konieczny
> mk@mk@.... >
> Yahoo! Groups Links




(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Your part number may be end of life due to a new chip number for RoHS
compliant parts. I'd check very carefully.

Dave kbu (sent by Nabble.com) wrote: > Already End of life.. that really SUCKS.. when I was seeing this 2
> months back I knew it was the only HCS12 with these features but no
> one (from freescale) said anything about EOL...
>
> Are there any alternatives for single chip integrated MAC/PHY + 16 or
> 32 bit processors ? There seem to be many MCU+MAC but no phy, and in
> my case the hassle of getting a board designed for the phy circuit is
> quite a pain.
>
> Yes this whole freescale's hype and lack of good support (i.e.
> responses to queries, broken Opentcp etc) is really dissapointing.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2503864
> Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

On Jan 21, 2006, at 10:32 AM, Dr. David A. Perreault wrote:

> Your part number may be end of life due to a new chip number for RoHS
> compliant parts. I'd check very carefully.

Good guess but the MC9S12NE64VTU is RoHS and NRFND.

--
David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@dkel...
========================================================================
Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

I had a quick look at the end of the NE64 page and both the non-ROHS and
ROHS are listed at EOL.

-----Original Message-----
From: 68HC12@68HC... [mailto:68HC12@68HC...] On Behalf
Of Dr. David A. Perreault
Sent: Sunday, 22 January 2006 3:33 AM
To: 68HC12@68HC...
Subject: Re: [68HC12] Future of the NE64 (was Re: confused about code
size (CW12 - 3.1))

Your part number may be end of life due to a new chip number for RoHS
compliant parts. I'd check very carefully.

Dave kbu (sent by Nabble.com) wrote: > Already End of life.. that really SUCKS.. when I was seeing this 2
> months back I knew it was the only HCS12 with these features but no
> one (from freescale) said anything about EOL...
>
> Are there any alternatives for single chip integrated MAC/PHY + 16 or
> 32 bit processors ? There seem to be many MCU+MAC but no phy, and in
> my case the hassle of getting a board designed for the phy circuit is
> quite a pain.
>
> Yes this whole freescale's hype and lack of good support (i.e.
> responses to queries, broken Opentcp etc) is really dissapointing.
> --
> View this message in context:
>
http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.
html#a2503864
> Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >. >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
SPONSORED LINKS

Freescale
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Freescale+semiconductor+inc&w1=Free
scale+semiconductor+inc&w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Pic+microcontrollers&w4=8
051+microprocessor&c=4&s=106&.sig=K2HGv-zFlv5OYUv_QxIq_Q> semiconductor
inc
Microcontrollers
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Microcontrollers&w1=Freescale+semic
onductor+inc&w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Pic+microcontrollers&w4=8051+micropr
ocessor&c=4&s=106&.sig=SYHwNJjjGQXRvtt_GybT4g>
Pic
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Pic+microcontrollers&w1=Freescale+s
emiconductor+inc&w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Pic+microcontrollers&w4=8051+mic
roprocessor&c=4&s=106&.sig=umVbbnUwsPzEzKKD_pQfUw> microcontrollers

8051
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=8051+microprocessor&w1=Freescale+se
miconductor+inc&w2=Microcontrollers&w3=Pic+microcontrollers&w4=8051+micr
oprocessor&c=4&s=106&.sig=NO-nSKjHoAlh9XtZ8LB1_A> microprocessor
_____

> Terms of Service.

_____
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> I had a quick look at the end of the NE64 page and both the non-ROHS and
> ROHS are listed at EOL.

I really couldn't belive that this part is phased out. It's just too short on
the market. Someone has written that it's maybe moving to "environmental
friendly" incarnation. So I spent some time digging through Freescale www.
That's what I found:
NE64 page - "not recommended":
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100
Then we have MC9S12NE64CPV Information page, still "not recommended":
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/search.partparamdetail.framework?PART_NUMBER=MC9S12NE64CPV&buyNow=true
After some digging through various "product change notices" and "enviromental
informations", I found this:
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/search.partparamdetail.framework?PART_NUMBER=MC9S12NE64CPVE&buyNow=false
Here we have:
Part Number MC9S12NE64CPVE
Life Cycle Description (code) PRODUCT RAPID GROWTH(2)
Status Available
On some other page (I lost the track):
Device Sample Availability Jan 2006
Device Production Quantity Availability Mar 2006

So it looks like MC9S12NE64CPV is replaced with MC9S12NE64CPVE, which is
"available", "product rapid growth" phase, sampled from January, Production
Quantity from March.

I'm not really sure that this info is correct, I still hope someone from
Freescale can jump in and tell us something. Why this info isn't available
directly under NE64 page - I don't know, the only thing we get is "not
recommended".

--
Michal Konieczny
mk@mk@....



______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Imany cases, Freescale parts with an E on the end are RoHS compliant
updates.

Dave
Michal Konieczny wrote:

> > I had a quick look at the end of the NE64 page and both the non-ROHS and
> > ROHS are listed at EOL.
>
> I really couldn't belive that this part is phased out. It's just too
> short on
> the market. Someone has written that it's maybe moving to "environmental
> friendly" incarnation. So I spent some time digging through Freescale www.
> That's what I found:
> NE64 page - "not recommended":
> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100
> <http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?code=MC9S12NE64&nodeId=0162468636K100>
> Then we have MC9S12NE64CPV Information page, still "not recommended":
> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/search.partparamdetail.framework?PART_NUMBER=MC9S12NE64CPV&buyNow=true
> <http://www.freescale.com/webapp/search.partparamdetail.framework?PART_NUMBER=MC9S12NE64CPV&buyNow=true>
> After some digging through various "product change notices" and
> "enviromental
> informations", I found this:
> http://www.freescale.com/webapp/search.partparamdetail.framework?PART_NUMBER=MC9S12NE64CPVE&buyNow=false
> <http://www.freescale.com/webapp/search.partparamdetail.framework?PART_NUMBER=MC9S12NE64CPVE&buyNow=false>
> Here we have:
> Part Number MC9S12NE64CPVE
> Life Cycle Description (code) PRODUCT RAPID GROWTH(2)
> Status Available
> On some other page (I lost the track):
> Device Sample Availability Jan 2006
> Device Production Quantity Availability Mar 2006
>
> So it looks like MC9S12NE64CPV is replaced with MC9S12NE64CPVE, which is
> "available", "product rapid growth" phase, sampled from January,
> Production
> Quantity from March.
>
> I'm not really sure that this info is correct, I still hope someone from
> Freescale can jump in and tell us something. Why this info isn't
> available
> directly under NE64 page - I don't know, the only thing we get is "not
> recommended".
>
> --
> Michal Konieczny
> mk@mk@....
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hello everybody,

I am new on this group....

I would like to know if somebody have information about this
product : EVB912DP256

I take much time to try to find it on freescale website but there is not information about the jumpers, pinout, etc...

Can anybody give me a hand?

Thanks in advance
Jorge ---------------------------------
Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Just do a part search for EVB912DP256 on freescale's website. Newark
says they have 3 in stopc arrow and Future list 0 stock. Freescales
website list two, the one ending in E which is RoHS compliant is shown
as available shortly.

Dave jorge munoz wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> I am new on this group....
>
> I would like to know if somebody have information about this
> product : EVB912DP256
>
> I take much time to try to find it on freescale website but there is
> not information about the jumpers, pinout, etc...
>
> Can anybody give me a hand?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Jorge > ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more
> on new and used cars.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Thanks Dave !!!!
I will do it.....

"David A. Perreault" <dap@dap@...> wrote:
Just do a part search for EVB912DP256 on freescale's website. Newark
says they have 3 in stopc arrow and Future list 0 stock. Freescales
website list two, the one ending in E which is RoHS compliant is shown
as available shortly.

Dave jorge munoz wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> I am new on this group....
>
> I would like to know if somebody have information about this
> product : EVB912DP256
>
> I take much time to try to find it on freescale website but there is
> not information about the jumpers, pinout, etc...
>
> Can anybody give me a hand?
>
> Thanks in advance
> Jorge > ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more
> on new and used cars.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
SPONSORED LINKS
Freescale semiconductor inc Microcontrollers Pic microcontrollers 8051 microprocessor

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS ---------------------------------
---------------------------------

What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., Michal Konieczny <0xmk@c...> wrote:

> So it looks like MC9S12NE64CPV is replaced with MC9S12NE64CPVE,
which is
> "available", "product rapid growth" phase, sampled from January,
Production
> Quantity from March.
>
> I'm not really sure that this info is correct, I still hope someone
from
> Freescale can jump in and tell us something. Why this info isn't
available
> directly under NE64 page - I don't know, the only thing we get is "not
> recommended".
>
> --
> Michal Konieczny
> mk@c... [chuckling], I don't know how you made it appear, but no "digging" is
needed now to find it.

Quite simply, when I saw this thread I looked and found that indeed,
only two were listed and both were "Not Recommended for New Design".

After you said this, I go back now and two more have magically
appeared, which are "Available". My speculation is that Freescale got
word of this discussion and quickly repaired their web pages. Well, I
guess better than nothing.



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi my name is Pon and I'm just got started in learning to program 68HC12. The 68HC12 microcontroller, is it being used in any industry? I know it's a great for student or anybody who wants to start learning to program microntrollers. Thanks.

Pon

Jefferson Smith <imajeff84663@imaj...> wrote:
--- In 68HC12@68HC..., Michal Konieczny <0xmk@c...> wrote:

> So it looks like MC9S12NE64CPV is replaced with MC9S12NE64CPVE,
which is
> "available", "product rapid growth" phase, sampled from January,
Production
> Quantity from March.
>
> I'm not really sure that this info is correct, I still hope someone
from
> Freescale can jump in and tell us something. Why this info isn't
available
> directly under NE64 page - I don't know, the only thing we get is "not
> recommended".
>
> --
> Michal Konieczny
> mk@c... [chuckling], I don't know how you made it appear, but no "digging" is
needed now to find it.

Quite simply, when I saw this thread I looked and found that indeed,
only two were listed and both were "Not Recommended for New Design".

After you said this, I go back now and two more have magically
appeared, which are "Available". My speculation is that Freescale got
word of this discussion and quickly repaired their web pages. Well, I
guess better than nothing.
SPONSORED LINKS
Freescale semiconductor inc Microcontrollers Pic microcontrollers 8051 microprocessor

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS ---------------------------------
---------------------------------

What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

The 68HC12 family is widely used in automotive-my guess is that it has the greatest penetration in
that market, though I'm not rigorously sure about that.
The NE64 version supports Ethernet and as such is probably most often used for computer peripherals
and industrial controls.
Best regards,
Kerry Berland

<mailto:kerry.berland@kerr...> kerry.berland@kerr...

Silicon Engines

3550 West Salt Creek Lane

Suite 105

Arlington Heights, IL 60005 USA

Phone 847-637-1180 Ext. 223

Fax 847-637-1185

<http://www.siliconengines.net/> www.siliconengines.net
NOTE: email address, office address, phones,

and website address changed 9/1/05,

please update your records.

-----Original Message-----
From: 68HC12@68HC... [mailto:68HC12@68HC...] On Behalf Of Pon Sayasith
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 1:00 PM
To: 68HC12@68HC...
Subject: Re: [68HC12] Re: Future of the NE64
Hi my name is Pon and I'm just got started in learning to program 68HC12. The 68HC12
microcontroller, is it being used in any industry? I know it's a great for student or anybody who
wants to start learning to program microntrollers. Thanks.

Pon

Jefferson Smith <imajeff84663@imaj...> wrote:
--- In 68HC12@68HC..., Michal Konieczny <0xmk@c...> wrote:

> So it looks like MC9S12NE64CPV is replaced with MC9S12NE64CPVE,
which is
> "available", "product rapid growth" phase, sampled from January,
Production
> Quantity from March.
>
> I'm not really sure that this info is correct, I still hope someone
from
> Freescale can jump in and tell us something. Why this info isn't
available
> directly under NE64 page - I don't know, the only thing we get is "not
> recommended".
>
> --
> Michal Konieczny
> mk@c... [chuckling], I don't know how you made it appear, but no "digging" is
needed now to find it.

Quite simply, when I saw this thread I looked and found that indeed,
only two were listed and both were "Not Recommended for New Design".

After you said this, I go back now and two more have magically
appeared, which are "Available". My speculation is that Freescale got
word of this discussion and quickly repaired their web pages. Well, I
guess better than nothing.
SPONSORED LINKS
Freescale semiconductor inc Microcontrollers Pic microcontrollers 8051
microprocessor

---------------------------------
> Service.
_____
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

______________________________
Stellaris® MCU Family: New Parts, New Package, New Price.


(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Phew!! that was a scary weekend, thinking about what the heck I was going to do with this chip out of production.. now I can go back to worrying about the crappy OpenTCP or (partially functional) uIP (no dhcp!)

Any idea what the 'E' actually represents given that both are RHOS compliant? The description says something about Manatee-EPP (what does that mean?) So does anyone actually use OpenTCP in a full production environment? What about uIP? Any suggestions on workarounds and best practices you would recommend in deploying apps on either of these stacks?

How do you manage the fact that this chip has a problem autonegotiating? (especially in up to date environments where most everyone has gigabit switches?)

Any idea if freescale has any plans to fix that bug?

Has anyone implemented this chip along with POE ? which POE chips have you used?

Whats the biggest sized rollout you have ever done using the NE64 (i.e. number of units)- just wondering how popular this thing really is.
Thanks.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2543066
Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> So does anyone actually use OpenTCP in a full production environment? What about uIP? Any suggestions on workarounds and best practices you would recommend in deploying apps on either of these stacks?

I wrote my own "stack". It's so critical component of such importance for my
products that there's no room for experimentation with the code unknown to me,
and the whole thing is not complicated enough to be prohibitive to rewrite
from scratch. Now I have the code that I know line by line, well tested and
clean (at least up to my personal standards). I looked at opentcp in the
meantime, and it appeared to be total mess to me. uIP looks promising, but I
didn't like the organization of the code - one big function, inside is the
single loop with many goto's, maybe that's good for compressing the code up to
the last byte, but not really readable. Choosing between opentcp and uIP -
it's simple - for example uIP implements reassembly of IP datagram fragments
and exponential backoff of tcp timeouts, two features that are very important
in my opinion to have in the final product to release it "into the wild" and
having it behaving well in the unknown network environment.
Many networking implementations for small micros assume perfect network
conditions that exist only on the desk, when you directly connect target
device with your PC via the single switch at most. That's very different from
the real world, when there's heavy load, packets get dropped, path MTU varies,
etc.

> How do you manage the fact that this chip has a problem autonegotiating? (especially in up to date environments where most everyone has gigabit switches?)

I have a procedure that restarts autonegotiation after previous failure. It
tries for 10 seconds. If it fails, it tries fixed 100M, then after 5secs 10M,
than back to auto. Retry with fixed 100 or 10 happens only when there's
failure of autonegotiation, and it doesn't happen when there's no connection
with the switch, so without cable it stays in auto waiting for autonegotiation
procedure to begin at all. I also have the option in the device (stored in the
EEPROM) that sets "auto", 10 or 100 fixed.

MY EXPERIENCE: along with my devices I released "application note" saying that
10M fixed is preferred, and that's the default. Why ? There's no real benefit
of 100M, there's almost always the switch that enables coexistence of 10M and
100M devices. Devices don't have data throughput that can use 100M bandwidth.
But the most important factor is power consumption. My device is: NE64, some
analog circuitry, some digital circuitry, switching power supply (LM2597, 12V
-> 3.3V). Here are the figures at 12V external power supply:
10Mbit/s: 47mA @ 12V
100Mbit/s: 104mA @ 12V. More than twice the current at 10M !
At 10M the device stays cool. At 100M it's really warm.
And using POE enlarges the problem, see below.

> Any idea if freescale has any plans to fix that bug?

Good question. I still wonder how they managed to release the chip with the
ACTLED output that is really unusable without software control. Looks like
nobody tried it before the release, really hard to believe, I can uderstand
some obscure bug in the autonegotiation procedure, but LED not blinking
visibly at all ?

> Has anyone implemented this chip along with POE ? which POE chips have you used?

Yes, I have POE as an option in some of my devices. I use Silver Telecom POE
modules, type Ag9000-S:
http://www.silvertel.com/poe_products.htm?Power+Over+Ethernet
I also considered some Texas Instrument modules (PTB48540), but they were
significantly larger, harder to mount as an "option".
Beware: you cannot use "standard" ethernet transformers for POE !

--
Michal Konieczny
mk@mk@....





(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Michal Konieczny-3 wrote:
>
> Many networking implementations for small micros assume perfect network
> conditions that exist only on the desk, when you directly connect target
> device with your PC via the single switch at most. That's very different from
> the real world, when there's heavy load, packets get dropped, path MTU varies,
> etc. What kind of features does your stack have? Are you perhaps looking at releasing this (opensource or commercial?). Some of the features I'm looking for are : DHCP/DNSClient/very simple WebClient, and as a blackbox, something that will just work in an enterprise environment (i.e. taking into account all the issues you mentioned)
> At 10M the device stays cool. At 100M it's really warm.
>
Have you done anything special to dissipate heat, over and above the appnote recommendations of 50% soldered area in contact with the exposed thermal pad?
kbu@...
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2545191
Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> What kind of features does your stack have? Are you perhaps looking at releasing this (opensource or commercial?). Some of the features I'm looking for are : DHCP/DNSClient/very simple WebClient, and as a blackbox, something that will just work in an enterprise environment (i.e. taking into account all the issues you mentioned)

All that was needed for now: IP - ARP - ICMP - UDP - IGMP (I use multicasting
for device discovery across router boundaries) - TCP - BOOTP client - DHCP
client - DNS client - NTP client - SNMP server - TELNET server - HTTP server.
http is for demonstration purposes only, nobody sane would point the browser
at individual devices when there are 20 or 30 of them. SNMP is for gathering
the data, and also private UDP messages.
Release it ? Commercially probably never, there's no point, and as open source
- maybe, when I convince my boss. I've already succeeded with releasing
hc12mem, which started as our internal tool, so there's hope ...

> Have you done anything special to dissipate heat, over and above the appnote recommendations of 50% soldered area in contact with the exposed thermal pad?

I use 112-pin NE64, and it doesn't have thermal pad. There's no problem with
overheating, I didn't say that. MCU itself at 100M gets really, really warm,
but not yet "hot", at 10M it stays warmer than ambient, but not much.

--
Michal Konieczny
mk@mk@....





(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> All that was needed for now: IP - ARP - ICMP - UDP - IGMP (I use multicasting
> for device discovery across router boundaries) - TCP - BOOTP client - DHCP
> client - DNS client - NTP client - SNMP server - TELNET server - HTTP server.
> http is for demonstration purposes only, nobody sane would point the browser
> at individual devices when there are 20 or 30 of them. SNMP is for gathering
> the data, and also private UDP messages. wow this does sound more or less like everything I need... I'm also guessing this has been compiled on gcc.. honestly putting this code out there would be a huge service to the community.. one big thing thats missing from opentcp and uip, exactly like you said is usability (experience) in real life networks.
so what does it take to convince your boss :-) --
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2548957
Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., Pon Sayasith <pon139@y...> wrote:

The 68hc12 devices are a superset of the 68hc11 that's been very
popular for many years. The 68hc11 is still popular in the field of
robotics. The 68hc12 (and newer 9s12 variations) are 16 bit
processors, and the 68hc11 is an 8 bit processor.

The 9s12 family is a fairly new version of the 68hc12, and it's
commonly used in schools right now.

You can get something like a Dragon12 (evbplus.com) as a good
beginners board. Do you have a class on microcontrollers, or are you
just learning them by yourself?

The reason I like these devices is because they offer high
performance, but they're easier to write code for than many other
devices (like PICs or Arms).

But sometimes a PIC is better for a very small application (they're
cheap and they come in a DIP that's easy to solder), or an
PowerPC/Arm/Coldfire might be better for a demanding application that
really needs a 32 bit processor.



(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

Hi

We also have a solution for the NE64, with 'out-of-the-box' projects
for GNU and IAR Embedded Workbench.

See a number of on line demos at www.mjbc.ch. [web cam to see device
controlled via Internet]

Small foot print with dynamic http, ftp, telnet as well as standard
bits and pieces.

Free, including free support, for educational establishments. With a
simulator allowing NE64 code to run in real time on PC (Ethereal
recordings can also be played back through the code for debugging,
learning or development).

For projects requiring more power, the code also runs on a SAM7X
(including simulator).

Regards

Mark Butcher
www.mjbc.ch --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "kbu (sent by Nabble.com)"
<lists@n...> wrote: > Phew!! that was a scary weekend, thinking about what the heck I
was going to do with this chip out of production.. now I can go back
to worrying about the crappy OpenTCP or (partially functional) uIP
(no dhcp!)
>
> Any idea what the 'E' actually represents given that both are RHOS
compliant? The description says something about Manatee-EPP (what
does that mean?) > So does anyone actually use OpenTCP in a full production
environment? What about uIP? Any suggestions on workarounds and best
practices you would recommend in deploying apps on either of these
stacks?
>
> How do you manage the fact that this chip has a problem
autonegotiating? (especially in up to date environments where most
everyone has gigabit switches?)
>
> Any idea if freescale has any plans to fix that bug?
>
> Has anyone implemented this chip along with POE ? which POE chips
have you used?
>
> Whats the biggest sized rollout you have ever done using the NE64
(i.e. number of units)- just wondering how popular this thing really
is.
> Thanks.
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-
code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2543066
> Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

manatee = MC9S12NE64

:-)

jasa --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "kbu (sent by Nabble.com)"
<lists@n...> wrote: > Phew!! that was a scary weekend, thinking about what the heck I was
going to do with this chip out of production.. now I can go back to
worrying about the crappy OpenTCP or (partially functional) uIP (no
dhcp!)
>
> Any idea what the 'E' actually represents given that both are RHOS
compliant? The description says something about Manatee-EPP (what
does that mean?) > So does anyone actually use OpenTCP in a full production
environment? What about uIP? Any suggestions on workarounds and best
practices you would recommend in deploying apps on either of these
stacks?
>
> How do you manage the fact that this chip has a problem
autonegotiating? (especially in up to date environments where most
everyone has gigabit switches?)
>
> Any idea if freescale has any plans to fix that bug?
>
> Has anyone implemented this chip along with POE ? which POE chips
have you used?
>
> Whats the biggest sized rollout you have ever done using the NE64
(i.e. number of units)- just wondering how popular this thing really
is.
> Thanks.
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/confused-about-
code-size-%28CW12---3.1%29-t964435.html#a2543066
> Sent from the MicroControllers - hc12 forum at Nabble.com. > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )

> wow this does sound more or less like everything I need...  I'm also guessing
this has been compiled on gcc..  honestly putting this code out there would be a huge
service to the community.. one big thing thats missing from opentcp and uip, exactly like
you said is usability (experience) in real life networks.
> so what does it take to convince your boss :-)

We need some spare man-hours. I have to detach it somewhat from current 
runtime environment, make it configurable, etc. So "one of these days" ...

-- 
Michal Konieczny
mk@mk@....

(You need to be a member of 68hc12 -- send a blank email to 68hc12-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )