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

They're going to introduce a new line of RISC 8 bit MCU's:

http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=181502582

some quotes:

"The RS08 will use the same bus structure as the more-expensive 8-bit
microcontrollers in the 9S08 family, making them compatible with
off-chip memories and peripherals. However, they will use a reduced
instruction set that supports smaller die sizes."

"Freescale will continue to develop 16-bit controllers for the
automotive market, Grimme said, but the industrial and consumer thrust
will be on the 8- and 32-bit lines."

This almost sounds bad for us 16-bit users of 9s12 devices who are not
involved in the automotive market?
	

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

Oh man...

Should i interprete this to meaning, that the 6812NE is 
almost "obsolete" already??

Please take this is yet another stupid thought from a 
wannabe newbie 6812 ethernet version guy...

Maybe i'm barking up the wrong tree??
WHAT should i/we be looking at instead?

Regards,
JP

> On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 04:35:46 -0000
> "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@engl...> wrote:
>    They're going to introduce a new line of RISC 8 bit 
>MCU's:
> 
> http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=181502582
> 
> some quotes:
> 
> "The RS08 will use the same bus structure as the 
>more-expensive 8-bit
> microcontrollers in the 9S08 family, making them 
>compatible with
> off-chip memories and peripherals. However, they will 
>use a reduced
> instruction set that supports smaller die sizes."
> 
> "Freescale will continue to develop 16-bit controllers 
>for the
> automotive market, Grimme said, but the industrial and 
>consumer thrust
> will be on the 8- and 32-bit lines."
> 
> This almost sounds bad for us 16-bit users of 9s12 
>devices who are not
> involved in the automotive market?
>
	

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

Eric Engler wrote:

> http://www.embedded.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=181502582

hmm, I see only a Microchip <-> Freescale comparison.

Why not mention AVR? A German catalog distributor lists the Atmega8 
for less than 1,5EUR in small quantities! I don't dare to ask for 
volume pricing.

You get not in the least a comparable controller from Freescale, the 
similar priced JK3 has _much_ less RAM/Flash/IO, the 9S08GT16 or AW16 
cost twice as much. What a pity.

[...]

> "Freescale will continue to develop 16-bit controllers for the
> automotive market, Grimme said, but the industrial and consumer thrust
> will be on the 8- and 32-bit lines."
> 
> This almost sounds bad for us 16-bit users of 9s12 devices who are not
> involved in the automotive market?

Maybe. Today you have to consider that you don't get your beloved 
controller over such a long period as the HC11 is/was available. 
Buying and setting up tools is more expensive therefore. Bad if you 
don't sell a million devices...

I'm also not glad if the thousands of EUR spent for compiler and 
debugger and the many hours of learning and setting up are lost.

But look at the ARM7 success, and the pricing of some derivatives. 
You get more power for the same money as with the 9S12.

Look also at the MCF5211, Freescale list the cheapest version at 
5.19$

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

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

Here's the architecture summary of the RS08:

http://www.freescale.com/files/microcontrollers/doc/brochure/BRRS08CORE.pdf

Having no SP at all, and no register X (which are among the 2 best
features of the hc08/hc11/hc12), makes this look like a good chip to
be introduced a dozen years ago.

It seems painful to write a C compiler to target something like this?
	

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

I was speaking to had a visit with a Distributer FAE
resently about Ethernet for HC12.  He told me that
Freescale had plans for more HC12 with Ethernet and
then put a halt to those plans.

He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
the Bottom.
	Len
	--- Eric Engler <englere.geo@engl...> wrote:

> Here's the architecture summary of the RS08:
> 
>
http://www.freescale.com/files/microcontrollers/doc/brochure/BRRS08CORE.pdf
> 
> Having no SP at all, and no register X (which are
> among the 2 best
> features of the hc08/hc11/hc12), makes this look
> like a good chip to
> be introduced a dozen years ago.
> 
> It seems painful to write a C compiler to target
> something like this?
> 
> 
> 
>
	__________________________________________________
">http://mail.yahoo.com 

______________________________
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 )

len burleson wrote:

[FAE about HC12 and Ethernet]

> He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12

well, especially for larger derivatives, this might be a good thing 
(cheap, fast controllers). I dislike the paged memory of the HC(S)12.

But I hope that we see more low end S12 derivatives, even smaller and 
cheaper than the MC9S12GC16 which questions the S08 IMO.

> market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
> the Bottom.

Not really!? See above. The S08 is not much cheaper but much slower. 
Only one 5V supply derivative available. HC908/S08 is my choice only 
for really small or extremly cheap applications.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

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

Hey guys, I read this post earlier and I wanted to make sure and
clarify (see below):

"Freescale will continue to develop 16-bit controllers for the
automotive market, Grimme said, but the industrial and consumer thrust
will be on the 8- and 32-bit lines."

This almost sounds bad for us 16-bit users of 9s12 devices who are not
involved in the automotive market?

----------------------------------
The S12s are definitely here to stay and will continue to be sold and
supported by Freescale into consumer and industrial markets as general
purpose products. The S12 roadmap has always been automotive-centric,
but the products make very good general purpose parts. Freescale will
continue to make this product roadmap available to the broad market.
As with all of our automotive products - this has the added benefit of
longer longer life cycles and additional temperature variants. As
noted in the rest of the article, moving forward there will be some
new 8 & 32-bit parts coming out that specifically target migration in
the consumer and industrial markets. 

Ed
	--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Oliver Betz" <list_ob@...> wrote:
>
> len burleson wrote:
> 
> [FAE about HC12 and Ethernet]
> 
> > He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
> 
> well, especially for larger derivatives, this might be a good thing 
> (cheap, fast controllers). I dislike the paged memory of the HC(S)12.
> 
> But I hope that we see more low end S12 derivatives, even smaller and 
> cheaper than the MC9S12GC16 which questions the S08 IMO.
> 
> > market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
> > the Bottom.
> 
> Not really!? See above. The S08 is not much cheaper but much slower. 
> Only one 5V supply derivative available. HC908/S08 is my choice only 
> for really small or extremly cheap applications.
> 
> Oliver
> -- 
> Oliver Betz, Muenchen
>
	

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

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., len burleson <wlenb@...> wrote:

> He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
> market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
> the Bottom.

This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire isn't very popular
compared to HC12. Here's some examples:

 - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08 and hc12, but not for
Coldfire.

 - Yahoo has active forums for 6808 and 6812, but not Coldfire

 - very few companies are making Coldfire development boards. Ditto
for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)

 - Freescale seems to favor the PowerPC over Coldfire; a few searches
at their web site make this clear

I personally like Coldfire, but it seems risky to use it in new
designs given its limited popularity at this time.

PowerPC's future is in doubt since the Apple pull-out.

The only 32 bit devices that are booming (aside from x86) is the Arm
variants. Although Freescale makes Arm devices, they try hard to keep
it a secret!

In summary, the hcs08 is probably going to wane because of the RS08
(also terrible because the hcs08 was just coming of age with it's
recent BDM support). The HC12 will wane because of the RS08. Coldfire
has been waning for years (although it deserved better), and
Freescale's Arm efforts are an insider's secret. RS08 is trying to
compete with extremely popular chips from Microchip and Atmel, and as
the new kid on the block it has to play catch-up. Either Freescale has
to get real serious about Coldfire real quick, or their future will be
in doubt.

Eric
	

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

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "edatmot" <edatmot@...> wrote:

> The S12s are definitely here to stay and will continue to be sold and
> supported by Freescale into consumer and industrial markets as general
> purpose products. 

I'm sure this is true for some time to come, and I certainly continue
to recommend 9s12 devices because these offer a nice programming model
and recently introduced members are low-cost and easy to use.

But I know that a great deal of attention goes into every word of
press releases, and they try to send signals by choosing their words
carefully. 

Since you seem to work for Freescale, can you please tell them that
they need to stop sending mixed signals on Coldfire? On one hand, they
have no forum for Coldfire and third party support for it is waning,
but on the other hand they're trying to "talk it up" for the future. I
want to see it do well, but the mixed signals have to stop! Freescale
has to show us they are serious about it, and not just tell us. Why
not a forum, and why not a file area? And some more code samples that
aren't several years old would be good...

Eric
	

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

Indeed! The mixed signals are causing worries. I have a NE64 design 
and possibly looking to use it in a few other designs as well, no one 
seems to know for certain if this is going to stay or dissappear. The 
general opinion seems to be like, use the Coldfire as an upgrade.

The recent supply problems with the S12 hasn't helped much either. 
Given the current situation, Philips LPC or Renesas seem like a 
viable alternative. I would hate to move away from the S12 and I hope 
Freescale comes up with an assuring plan. 

Regds
Jay

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@...> wrote:
>
> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "edatmot" <edatmot@> wrote:
> 
> > The S12s are definitely here to stay and will continue to be sold 
and
> > supported by Freescale into consumer and industrial markets as 
general
> > purpose products. 
> 
> I'm sure this is true for some time to come, and I certainly 
continue
> to recommend 9s12 devices because these offer a nice programming 
model
> and recently introduced members are low-cost and easy to use.
> 
> But I know that a great deal of attention goes into every word of
> press releases, and they try to send signals by choosing their words
> carefully. 
> 
> Since you seem to work for Freescale, can you please tell them that
> they need to stop sending mixed signals on Coldfire? On one hand, 
they
> have no forum for Coldfire and third party support for it is waning,
> but on the other hand they're trying to "talk it up" for the 
future. I
> want to see it do well, but the mixed signals have to stop! 
Freescale
> has to show us they are serious about it, and not just tell us. Why
> not a forum, and why not a file area? And some more code samples 
that
> aren't several years old would be good...
> 
> Eric
>
	

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

Oh common. Freescale will never shoot themselves in the foot by just 
"dropping" the HC12 series - they very well know such a move will be the end 
for them. Customers choose micro processors/controllers based on the 
trustworthyness of the company. For Freescale to just drop the ball on the 
HC12 series will be a disasterous move for them that they know very well - 
please stop the paranoia. Not to mention development tool providers that 
spend hundreds of thousand dollars on the HC12 market.

Rest assure that Freescale would not be that stupid.

Yes, there is a move to 32 bitters but only for the ARM market since it 
provide free dev. tools that  make porting of Linux e TCP/IP stacks easy and 
affordable. Since the future seems to be a TCP/IP stack on each embedded 
micro, a 32 bit seems to be the road to go - at the proverbial 8 bit price.

The road for 8 versus 16 bitters is less clear. There is always the odd 8 
bitter that boast a NEW function that sports some "16 bit" or "32 bit"

extensions to get ahead of the competition - so why just dont stick to 16 
bits and sell it as a 8 bitter with some "16 bit extensions" .....ha ha ha.

Seems like the team from India convinced that they can "re-invent" the micro 
from scratch (and make it better) and that it should have been a RISC 
solution after all. I mean, we can fit so much sram and rom on a micro at 
super clock rates now that, in hinsight cheewiz, a RISC instruction set will 
do the job afterall  -EUREKA!!

On the other hand, if Freescale do drop the HC12 i will drop them for a 
X-scale (Intel) or a ARM 32bit supplier (such as Philips - a big and stable 
company) that support Linux or WindowsCE. For 16 bit solutions i will move 
to another well trusted company TI with their M430 variants.
	----- Original Message ----- 
From: "hc08jb8" <hc08jb8@hc08...>
To: <68HC12@68HC...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:21 PM
Subject: [68HC12] Re: Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking good?
	>
> Indeed! The mixed signals are causing worries. I have a NE64 design
> and possibly looking to use it in a few other designs as well, no one
> seems to know for certain if this is going to stay or dissappear. The
> general opinion seems to be like, use the Coldfire as an upgrade.
>
> The recent supply problems with the S12 hasn't helped much either.
> Given the current situation, Philips LPC or Renesas seem like a
> viable alternative. I would hate to move away from the S12 and I hope
> Freescale comes up with an assuring plan.
>
> Regds
> Jay
>
> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@...> wrote:
>>
>> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., "edatmot" <edatmot@> wrote:
>>
>> > The S12s are definitely here to stay and will continue to be sold
> and
>> > supported by Freescale into consumer and industrial markets as
> general
>> > purpose products.
>>
>> I'm sure this is true for some time to come, and I certainly
> continue
>> to recommend 9s12 devices because these offer a nice programming
> model
>> and recently introduced members are low-cost and easy to use.
>>
>> But I know that a great deal of attention goes into every word of
>> press releases, and they try to send signals by choosing their words
>> carefully.
>>
>> Since you seem to work for Freescale, can you please tell them that
>> they need to stop sending mixed signals on Coldfire? On one hand,
> they
>> have no forum for Coldfire and third party support for it is waning,
>> but on the other hand they're trying to "talk it up" for the
> future. I
>> want to see it do well, but the mixed signals have to stop!
> Freescale
>> has to show us they are serious about it, and not just tell us. Why
>> not a forum, and why not a file area? And some more code samples
> that
>> aren't several years old would be good...
>>
>> Eric
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
	

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

> > He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
> > market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
> > the Bottom.

The problem with the HC12, IMHO, is that it is way too expensive for
the power it delivers. If you want a low-end chip, you want something
that is very cheap. 

Now, from Freescale's website:

S12DT256 @ 25MHz w/256K FLASH and 12K RAM ~ $13

If you are happy to pay just a bit more:

MAC7101 @ 40MHz w/512K FLASH and 32K RAM ~ $15

or you can go to Philips:

LPC2138 @ 60MHz w/512K FLASH and 32K RAM ~ $9

So why would you use a HC12 with its 16/8-bit architecture running
at 25MHz, struggle with the paged FLASH and all that when you can
have an ARM core with more FLASH and more RAM, linear address space,
supported by every tool company? The new ARM based chips actually
lean heavily even on the 8 bit market, for the LPC2103 with 32K of
FLASH and 8K of RAM is less than $5 (one off) even on DigiKey and 
you can get it for 2.50 in significant quantities - a serious
competitor for a HC08 or an AVR or even for some of the 8051
derivatives out there. An 8-bitter in this world should be less 
than $2 but preferably less than $1 in large quantities. Otherwise 
it is just not worth to use it, to get less computing power for the 
same money. A 16-bit chip would probably be well priced somewhere
around the $5-6 mark but not over $10.

I have always been a Motorola fan and adored their thought-out chips
and all. But I understand that simple economics forces them if not
abandon but at least not to spend much effort to develop further a 
chip that is underpowered and expensive compared to other chips.

Zoltan

______________________________
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 )

Eric Engler wrote:

[...]

> This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire isn't very popular
> compared to HC12. Here's some examples:
>
>  - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08 and hc12, but not for
> Coldfire.

There is a mailinglist at WildRice.com.

>  - very few companies are making Coldfire development boards. Ditto
> for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
> they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)

I guess that gcc will produce good code for the Coldfire, while you 
might want to buy Cosmic or Hiware for the HC12 to get the very good 
code.

If there is a market, there will be more BDM solutions.

For me it's worse that the Coldfire has more dedicated pins that the 
S12.

>  - Freescale seems to favor the PowerPC over Coldfire; a few searches at
> their web site make this clear

I must have been missing the cheap PowerPC microcontroller with 
Flash.

BTW: we didn't talk about 56F8xxx.

[...]

> recent BDM support). The HC12 will wane because of the RS08. Coldfire

I can't imagine that a further stripped HC08 will be a competition 
for the S12. The S12 is not only fast because he has 24 or 40MHz bus 
clock, but also because of the 16 bit memory interface and the 
instruction set.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

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

Zoltan wrote:

[...]

> The problem with the HC12, IMHO, is that it is way too expensive for
> the power it delivers. If you want a low-end chip, you want something

100% Ack.

[S12DT256 $13 vs. LPC2138 $9]

Or the low end, LPC2101/2/3 vs. S12GC16, approx. the same ratio.

> So why would you use a HC12 with its 16/8-bit architecture running
> at 25MHz, struggle with the paged FLASH and all that when you can
> have an ARM core with more FLASH and more RAM, linear address space,
> supported by every tool company? The new ARM based chips actually

The 60MHz LPC2... is not so much faster than a 25MHz S12 and division 
is even slower. It depends on the application.

Probably the ARM7 code is larger than S12 code, you have to take this 
into account when comparing devices. LPC2* still cheaper.

1,8V + 3,6V supply voltage. My "stone age grade" apps often _need_ 5V 
levels, so that's a noticeable disadvantage. At least most I/O is 5V 
tolerant (missing on S08 derivatives!) so I needed only output 
buffers.

The LPC2* have no non-intrusive debugging capability like BDM. For 
me, that's a strong reason, because I have some "hard realtime" 
applications which I can't debug with interrupt driven methods. So I 
needed an emulator...

But all this doesn't justify the much higher prices.

As soon as the application doesn't need 5V and non-intrusive BDM 
debugging, I will check the ARM7 world.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

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

I've thought for years that an HC11F1 with 32K of flash on chip would have  
been a mega avr killer. There are a few things the hc11 has that the avrs  
dont.... swi, rti, illegal opcode trap, von neuman achetecture so you dont need  
extra const char print librbray functions. It already ran at 20mhz clock... 
darn  avr only runs at 16mhz still.... they havent pushed their 20mhz process 
into  their mega cpus yet....  I bet all you guys would design in a new 32k flash 
 hc11 next month if it came out wouldnt you?
	[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 )

Good day Eric,

In response to your comments about the Coldfire, I totally disagree.

> This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire isn't very popular
> compared to HC12. Here's some examples:
>

As for popularity, this must be taken with a grain of salt, as the CF is a 
relatively new product compare to the 12.  Remember that the 12's origins 
are with the HC11 which date to the 80s...Obviously a lot of the HC11 
designs migrated to the 12 and so the popularity migrated accordingly.

> - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08 and hc12, but not for
> Coldfire.
>
> - Yahoo has active forums for 6808 and 6812, but not Coldfire

There is a very large and active CF forum located here
http://www.WildRice.com/ColdFire/

It is true that Freescale does not have a dedicated one, but I think the
reason is that the Wildrice is very popular.  In fact many posts are from
Freescale themselves.

> - very few companies are making Coldfire development boards. Ditto
> for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
> they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)
Again, I think this is false.  There are several vendors who support CF:
http://www.arcturusnetworks.com
http://www.netburner.com
http://www.axman.com
http://www.phytec.com
http://www.emacinc.com/
http://www.steroidmicros.com/
and several others

> I personally like Coldfire, but it seems risky to use it in new
> designs given its limited popularity at this time.
I again disagree.  Freescale has released so many new CF variances (LCD 
interfaces, etc) in the last year that it is difficult to keep count.  In 
fact, many FAEs I talked to see the CF line to be the dominant growth path 
for Freescale.

Take a look at the MCF5213... This part is priced roughly on par with the 
HC12 and has a lot more functionality, Flash, memory, etc... Not to mention 
a more sophisticated debug environement...

Don't get me wrong, I really like the HC12, but given the functionality and 
price points of the CF, most of our and my colleagues designs are migrating 
to the CF.

Cheers,

Sam
	----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Engler" <englere.geo@engl...>
To: <68HC12@68HC...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 8:09 PM
Subject: [68HC12] Re: Freescale's new roadmap - 9s12 not looking good?
	> --- In 68HC12@68HC..., len burleson <wlenb@...> wrote:
>
>> He said that ColdFire was pushing down onto the HC12
>> market from the top while the hc08 was pushing from
>> the Bottom.
>
> This is true, but sad, considering that Coldfire isn't very popular
> compared to HC12. Here's some examples:
>
> - Freescale's web site has forums for hc08 and hc12, but not for
> Coldfire.
>
> - Yahoo has active forums for 6808 and 6812, but not Coldfire
>
> - very few companies are making Coldfire development boards. Ditto
> for third party compilers (although a lot of them claim to support it,
> they aren't making many new releases of the Coldfire tools)
>
> - Freescale seems to favor the PowerPC over Coldfire; a few searches
> at their web site make this clear
>
> I personally like Coldfire, but it seems risky to use it in new
> designs given its limited popularity at this time.
>
> PowerPC's future is in doubt since the Apple pull-out.
>
> The only 32 bit devices that are booming (aside from x86) is the Arm
> variants. Although Freescale makes Arm devices, they try hard to keep
> it a secret!
>
> In summary, the hcs08 is probably going to wane because of the RS08
> (also terrible because the hcs08 was just coming of age with it's
> recent BDM support). The HC12 will wane because of the RS08. Coldfire
> has been waning for years (although it deserved better), and
> Freescale's Arm efforts are an insider's secret. RS08 is trying to
> compete with extremely popular chips from Microchip and Atmel, and as
> the new kid on the block it has to play catch-up. Either Freescale has
> to get real serious about Coldfire real quick, or their future will be
> in doubt.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
	

______________________________
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 )

> The LPC2* have no non-intrusive debugging capability like BDM. For 
> me, that's a strong reason, because I have some "hard realtime" 
> applications which I can't debug with interrupt driven methods. So I 
> needed an emulator...

What is "non-intrusive"? The LPC2103 definitely has JTAG based
in-circuit debugger interface, much like the OnCE on the Motorola 
MCORE chips or the BDM on the MPC8xx chips. So what's the
difference between the HC12 BDM and those?

Thanks,

Zoltan
	

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

Zoltan wrote:

[The LPC2* have no non-intrusive debugging capability like BDM]

> What is "non-intrusive"? The LPC2103 definitely has JTAG based
> in-circuit debugger interface, much like the OnCE on the Motorola 
> MCORE chips or the BDM on the MPC8xx chips. So what's the
> difference between the HC12 BDM and those?

Probably I'm not well informed. I heared that there should be some 
devices with extended debug possibilities, but AFAIK you can't read 
LPC2103 memory without interrupting the running application.

Can you tell me which ARM7 devices support real "background" memory 
access working without the help of a interrupt driven target monitor 
firmware?

And which debugger (hardware + software, pricing) supports this 
feature?

BTW: _much_ more pins are needed for the ARM7 debug interface!

Maybe the limitations I mentioned are no more valid, this could 
facilitate a switch to small ARM7. Yesterday I learned that the 
S12GC16 costs more than twice the amount of a LPC2102 (>3,6EUR@1000 
vs. 1,8EUR at even smaller quantities)! Annoying that they need two 
supply voltages and don't work at 5V.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

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

"Oliver Betz" <list_ob@list...> wrote:

> Zoltan wrote:
> 
> [The LPC2* have no non-intrusive debugging capability like BDM]
> 
> > What is "non-intrusive"? The LPC2103 definitely has JTAG based
> > in-circuit debugger interface, much like the OnCE on the Motorola 
> > MCORE chips or the BDM on the MPC8xx chips. So what's the
> > difference between the HC12 BDM and those?
> 
> Probably I'm not well informed. I heared that there should be some 
> devices with extended debug possibilities, but AFAIK you can't read 
> LPC2103 memory without interrupting the running application.

I do not think you can - that's why I said it was like the MCORE and
the MPC8xx debug port. Like those chips, it works by allowing you to
issue arbitrary CPU instructions through the debug port and have a
special register to transfer data between the chip and the debug SW.
Actually you can't read the memory even with the 683xx and HC16 BDM
while the code is running, as far as I know. You have to halt the chip
for that, although you do not need to use the CPU core to access the
memory.

> Can you tell me which ARM7 devices support real "background" memory 
> access working without the help of a interrupt driven target monitor 
> firmware?

I don't think any does. You can have 'watchpoints' where the on-chip
debug HW checks all bus cycles against accessing an address but if you
want to actually read/write memory or registers, you have to halt the
core. You don't need any target resident SW for that, but it is not
real-time. I'll check if the watchpoint stuff can actually tell you
what the new value of the watched location is without halting the
core, but I doubt it.

> And which debugger (hardware + software, pricing) supports this 
> feature?

Well, the devkits and tools vary in price, USB based debug pods
and (limited) compiler for Windows are around US $200 - $300. 
If you go to the Philips website and look up the 2103 they have 
a handful of links to devkit, debug pod and SW vendors. I have
no clue if there's gdb/Linux support for any of those pods, of
course gcc happily compiles for ARM.

> BTW: _much_ more pins are needed for the ARM7 debug interface!

No quastion about that - you can hardly beat a 1-wire interface :-)

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to convert you from HC12 to ARM,
I just didn't know what you meant by non-intrusive, that's all.
On the other hand, those ARM chips are really cheap.
 
> Maybe the limitations I mentioned are no more valid, this could 
> facilitate a switch to small ARM7. Yesterday I learned that the 
> S12GC16 costs more than twice the amount of a LPC2102 (>3,6EUR@1000 
> vs. 1,8EUR at even smaller quantities)! Annoying that they need two 
> supply voltages and don't work at 5V.

Yes, that's a drawback. The MCORE is quite nice in that sense, it runs
from 3.3V but it's 5V tolerant and the A/D section actually runs from
5V and of course converts between 0 and 5V. A tad more expensive than
the HC12, though, around $15 in quantities for a 33MHz 256K FLASH 32K
RAM part (MMC2114). Comes with or without external bus, too. An other
cool but orphaned Motorola part :-(

Zoltan

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

Zoltan wrote:

[LPC2* non-intrusive debugging capability?]

> I do not think you can - that's why I said it was like the MCORE and
> the MPC8xx debug port. Like those chips, it works by allowing you to

I see.

[...]

> Don't get me wrong, I don't want to convert you from HC12 to ARM,

I didn't think you want to convince me. I only wanted to be sure that 
my knowledge about LPC2* debug capabilities is still correct, as I'm 
considering to use them, but still had no application justifying the 
switch.

Working with the HC12 since several years now, I have to say that the 
background memory access is priceless. Especially in small and/or 
"hard realtime" devices it's extremly useful that you simply attach 
four wires and get reasonable access to the CPU. If I understand 
correctly, the coldfire BDM is even better.

Well, if I save enough money buying ARM7, I can pay the longer debug 
time and/or buy an emulator.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

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

--- In 68HC12@68HC..., "Oliver Betz" <list_ob@...> wrote:

> Well, if I save enough money buying ARM7, I can pay the longer debug 
> time and/or buy an emulator.

You guys are right about JTAG debugging on the ARM being less good
than BDM. But the overall costs of ARM dev boards has been dropping a
lot, and they're now quite cheap. Perhaps cheaper than a Coldfire
board/BDM combo.

$300 can get you a nice dev board that uses the lpc2148 USB-enabled
ARM chip, along with a USB JTAG debug device. And it comes with a 32K
limited version of the IAR Embedded Workshop, which is good enough for
many purposes.

I got a cool little lpc2103 dev board disguised as a Christmas tree
with a set of blinking LEDs under program control, and a 2 line LCD
screen. The cost was about $20, including postage from Sweden to the
US. This kind of power in a fully assembled board is incredible at
this price. I guess some Europeans would have needed to pay a high tax
on it, but it's still a great deal. These devices were connected to a
PC serial port, and a Java program on the PC connected them to the
Internet, thereby creating a large Christmas tree network where people
could exchange greetings over the holidays. This was made by
EmbeddedArtists.

To use gcc/gdb you'll need a JTAG device with an open API. Amontec
makes a USB device with an open API, but most gcc uses use a Wiggler
clone by Olimex, which is a cheap PC parallel port device.

But I am not recommending that people flock away from the hc12. I
still like it best, especially if I have to write assembler routines
(everyone hates Arm assembly code - even the company reps I've talked
to). And I'll look into the new Coldfire devices - that might be a
great way to do 32 bits.

Eric
	

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

Good day Eric,

> 6812 came from the 6811, which came from the 6801, which came from the
> 6800. So if you want to take this approach the 6800 comes from the

Indeed, I do not wish to belabor this issue.  My only point was that the
HC12 was a migratory path taken by the users of the HC11 et all and
therefore had a lot more people familiar with the overall architecture.  The
CF had its origins with the 68000, but this too came much later than the
6800/6801 et all, hence the familiarity would not be as large.

>(a guy in my micros class in college built one of these in a
> shoebox - it was the coolest thing to play with back then).
>

I hate to say it, but I used to "play" a lot with the 6800 derivatives when
I was in school.  In fact, I still have my old 6809 lab project somewhere...
Given the limited amount of memory (EPROM/RAM) we still were able to make
some cool devices (rudimentary voice recognition, HVAC controllers, printer
muxes, etc)
	>This is good news, but my point is that FREESCALE does not have such a
>forum because they think there isn't much interest in 68K/Colfire.

I think that you should talk to other Freescale employees and disti FAEs.
The CF family has a tremendous following with an amazing feature set and
architecture.  We have several products based on the CF family and are
starting to migrate a lot of the lower 8 (and 16) bit designs to the CF
family.

As I said in my earlier post, you should really check out the variety of CF
derivatives... All sorts of speeds and features.
	> You might be too young to remember the famous Motorola BBS that was
> popular before the Internet became popular. This was largely

Sadly, I do remember... I guess I am not too young...In fact, I used those 
BBSes often.
	> Ditto for this forum, but Freescale set up their own hc12 forum, anyway.

I wish I could answer this, but I cannot.  Perhaps someone from Freescale 
can answer.

> How many of these have Coldfire boards that were introduced within the
> past 12 months? I'm sure some of them do, but my google searching
> showed that most 68K/Coldfire hardware and software in the marketplace
> tends to be several years old. I'd love to be wrong on this!

Check out my previous post's links... There are a variety of designs that 
have been released within the last year.  The two CF parts that has me most 
excited are:

    1. MCF5213... which to me is a HC12 eater
    Price and Performance kicks!

    2. MCF5329... Ethernet, LCD interface, DDR interface, QSPI, etc
    This part rocks!

Also, I think that there is a lot of vendors that do not sell their CF 
designs openly...i.e. they sell end-products as opposed to being embedded 
solution vendors.
I know that this is true for both my client's and my firm's designs.  In 
fact, given the 9S12's future rumblings, my client is most likely migrating 
to the MCF5213.
	> What happened to the cool 68332 chip? It was the best thing going a
> few years ago (maybe 5 or 6 - the older I get the faster the calendar
> moves for some reason).

Yes, the '332 was (is) awesome.  This chip actually dates back to the early 
90's ( I know we did a design around 1992/93 with the 332).  Consequently, 
Freescale considers this to be a mature part and is not high on the priority 
scale with adding new features, etc.  In fact, as an indicator to the 
68332's interest, its Yahoo list (  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/68300/) 
shows very little activity...perhaps a few posts every few months.

Anyway, I think that if you really look at the CF family and implement a 
design with it, you will find it to be a very rich and rewarding experience 
from both a hardware and software perspective.  In my opinion after having 
designed both hardware and software (firmware) for the old 6800's, HC11's, 
HC08's, HC16s, 68332s, and CFs (5272, 5282, 5213, 5329, etc), I find that 
the CF family the best to work with....I know that statement sounds corny, 
but it is true... and for those that may be wondering...No, I do not work 
for Freescale!

Enough said!

Have a great evening!

Cheers,

Sam
	

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

Eric Engler wrote:

> > Well, if I save enough money buying ARM7, I can pay the longer debug 
> > time and/or buy an emulator.
> 
> You guys are right about JTAG debugging on the ARM being less good
> than BDM. But the overall costs of ARM dev boards has been dropping a

With "the longer debug time and/or buy an emulator" I meant that I 
can either:
- spend more time debugging with ARM JTAG than with the superior BDM
- or spend (much) more money to buy a full emulator.

Hmm, neither Nohau nor iSYSTEM seem to offer LPC2* emulators.

Usually the cost of a dev board is negligible, IOW much less than the 
overall cost of introducing a new processor family.

Oliver
-- 
Oliver Betz, Muenchen
	

______________________________
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 )