On May 4, 2:03 am, Jim Granville <no.s...@designtools.maps.co.nz>
wrote:
> linnix wrote:
> > On May 3, 12:45 pm, Roland Latour <bo...@bogus.com> wrote:
>
> >>The response (trimmed) below, sounds great, but who is "We" mentioned
> >>just before item 7 below? I checked 'linnix.info-for.us' but that URL
> >>is 'Parked'. So where do I go to check out this '6502 core' uP?
> >>At this price, I'm ready to order! Thanks.
>
> > The initial batch is being die-bonded at the moment, but we should
> > have them ready in a couple of week.  The chip spec is at:
>
> >http://san-tech-lcd.info/proto/
>
> >>>16K One Time Programmable PROM.
> >>>A real time clock
> >>>LCD driver (up to 12 segments and 4 commons)
> >>>50 cents for the uC.
> >>>5 dollars for the evaluation board.
> >>>free C compiler.
> >>>6502 core in a 32 pins QFP (5mm x 5mm)
>
> Interesting looking device.
>
> What volumes is the 50c price point for ?
> is that price for the die, or the tested/packaged device ?

For the die: 50c for the OTP PROM version, 25c for the ROM version.
They should be known good die.  They can be die bonded to the PCB
directly.

>
> With OTP, what yields do you expect ? (as you cannot test the OTP)

It doesn't matter, we will use the ROM for production anyway,

>
> What debug pathway is there for this device ?

Not much.  The OTP is the test chip at 50c at a time.

>
> SST had a Flash 28p Device with a 6502 core, called the SST65P542R,

But this one has LCD controller, which is what we need.

> which targeted remote control. The 2001 data sheet can still be found,
> but the chip seems to no longer exist.
>
> -jg

On Sat, 3 May 2008 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT), AC Me <m...@gofree.indigo.ie>
wrote:

>1. Very small power consumption. It would be nice if the uC would be
>capable of operating from the merest suggestion of a hint of a
>picowatt :)

There are several. I'd start with MSP430 and AVR.

>2. A 1-Wire interface would be nice. This would make the development
>process easier.

No mcu has a dedicated 1w port. You can make a 1-w master either with a
single port pin or (easier) with an UART. 

See AVR Appnote 318. Instead of the shown oc buffer you can simply use an
74HC125 or 74HC126 (can't remember which one has the non-inverted gate)

>3. The ability to store perhaps 2GB of data. I believe this would
>require the means to either write/read a MMC/SD card or a USB memory
>device (a memory stick, I believe these are called). It would be nice
>if the uC had the capability to access the MMC/SD or USB directly
>although using one of the more common uC interfaces (e.g. SPI) is
>probably all that can be expected.

USB is too complex. SDs card can be switched to SPI mode, so this is your
way. 

>6. The ability to transfer the stored data to a PC. If a USB memory
-> #3

>7. A real time clock

There are plenty of i2c or spi rtc chips. The Philips/NXP PCF8583 and
PCF8593 are popular and cheap ones.

>8. Some mechanism to configure the device - for example the date and
>time; this could be via a PC link or perhaps the use of on-board
>switches and an LCD. If switches/LCD then the ability to drive an LCD
>would be required. If a PC link then perhaps an RS232 interface, or
>the use of the previously mentioned USB/Ethernet interfaces (but this
>could perhaps make things a tad more complicated than they need to
>be). Of course, I could provide both an on-board mechanism to
>configure the device and a PC link.

A serial port will be the easiest way.

>9. Reasonable overall cost.
>10. The availability of evaluation boards at perhaps $100 or less.
>11. Free or cheap development tools

If you go for AVR you don't need to buy anything. Grab AVRStudio from Atmel,
the WinAVR GCC plus something like Ponyprog or avrdude for ISP programming.
A parallel port programmer cable is easy to build. Or (better) obtain an
AVRISPmk2 USB cable for 36$ (e.g. Digikey). If you want an eval board, go
for the STK500. There are cheaper ones, but the STK500 is a programmer as
well, and it is the only one to support high voltage programming, which you
might need when messing around with the fuses.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Frank-Christian Krügel

AC Me wrote:

> I believe about 2GB of data. Hence my desire to use an USB memory
> stick, which was mentioned later in the post.

It's quite certainly way outside your reach to implement a USB master.
The power requirement would kill your battery lifetime, and the 
complexity of this part alone would dwarf the entire rest of the job.

> Is there an alternative means to store 2GB of data?

Any type of memory card: MMC, SD-in-MMC-mode, compact-flash cards.  You 
take your pick.

> But this has an impact on how I connect to the device (the data 
> logger) for configuration purposes. The PC I am using to write this
> does not have a 9-pin, or 15-pin, serial port.

That's the least of your problems.  If you're going to program micros 
with that PC, you'll need a USB-to-RS232 converter anyway.  Use that to 
talk to the micro, and you're done.

On 2008-05-04, Frank-Christian Kruegel <d...@news.invalid> wrote:

>>9. Reasonable overall cost.
>>10. The availability of evaluation boards at perhaps $100 or less.
>>11. Free or cheap development tools
>
> If you go for AVR you don't need to buy anything.

Same for MSP430.  There's a free limited IAR toolchain you can
download from TI.  And there's mspgcc, which is also free.
Parallel-port JTAG interfaces start at about $15, and eval
boards at about $20.  

www.sparkfun.com has a good selection of stuff for both MSP430 and
AVR.

-- 
Grant

On May 4, 9:40 am, Grant Edwards <gra...@visi.com> wrote:
> On 2008-05-04, Frank-Christian Kruegel <dontmai...@news.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>9. Reasonable overall cost.
> >>10. The availability of evaluation boards at perhaps $100 or less.
> >>11. Free or cheap development tools
>
> > If you go for AVR you don't need to buy anything.
>
> Same for MSP430.  There's a free limited IAR toolchain you can
> download from TI.  And there's mspgcc, which is also free.
> Parallel-port JTAG interfaces start at about $15, and eval
> boards at about $20.
>

But both chips are too expensive.  We asked Atmel to give us something
like the

http://san-tech-lcd.info/images/ST2.gif

They think we are nutty, so we have to downgrade to 6502 for the high
volume project.

AC Me wrote:
8<  Wishful thinking snipped >8

Have you seen any project/products on the net the even comes close to 
your requirements ??

I think you will find some devices that will be close.


So look at those and see what those have for storage vs power 
specifications.

This will give you a good idea what others have found and what design 
tradeoffs they have made.

Why re-invent the wheel, again.

donald

linnix wrote:

>>What volumes is the 50c price point for ?
>>is that price for the die, or the tested/packaged device ?
> 
> 
> For the die: 50c for the OTP PROM version, 25c for the ROM version.
> They should be known good die.  They can be die bonded to the PCB
> directly.

Is this really two different die designs, or is the ROM actually 
factory-otp ?

I'm guessing most of the large price difference is a volume thing.

Silabs have been ramping OTP models, which suggest there is still
some price penalty for FLASH (at least at their FAB), but they
make no mention of ROM.

-jg

On May 4, 1:57 pm, Jim Granville <no.s...@designtools.maps.co.nz>
wrote:
> linnix wrote:
> >>What volumes is the 50c price point for ?
> >>is that price for the die, or the tested/packaged device ?
>
> > For the die: 50c for the OTP PROM version, 25c for the ROM version.
> > They should be known good die.  They can be die bonded to the PCB
> > directly.
>
> Is this really two different die designs, or is the ROM actually
> factory-otp ?

It's two different dice.  The OTP die has a few more pads as well.

>
> I'm guessing most of the large price difference is a volume thing.
>
> Silabs have been ramping OTP models, which suggest there is still
> some price penalty for FLASH (at least at their FAB), but they
> make no mention of ROM.

Flash is good for developments.  OTP PROM is good for testings.  ROM
is good for productions.

We might build an FPGA emulator for developments, probably with SRAM.

>
> -jg

On May 4, 4:41=A0pm, Frank-Christian Kruegel <dontmai...@news.invalid>
wrote:
> On Sat, 3 May 2008 10:51:56 -0700 (PDT), AC Me <mmal...@gofree.indigo.ie>
> wrote:
>
> >1. Very small power consumption. It would be nice if the uC would be
> >capable of operating from the merest suggestion of a hint of a
> >picowatt :)
>
> There are several. I'd start with MSP430 and AVR.
>
> >2. A 1-Wire interface would be nice. This would make the development
> >process easier.
>
> No mcu has a dedicated 1w port. You can make a 1-w master either with a
> single port pin or (easier) with an UART.

The MAXQ2000?
>
> See AVR Appnote 318. Instead of the shown oc buffer you can simply use an
> 74HC125 or 74HC126 (can't remember which one has the non-inverted gate)
>
> >3. The ability to store perhaps 2GB of data. I believe this would
> >require the means to either write/read a MMC/SD card or a USB memory
> >device (a memory stick, I believe these are called). It would be nice
> >if the uC had the capability to access the MMC/SD or USB directly
> >although using one of the more common uC interfaces (e.g. SPI) is
> >probably all that can be expected.
>
> USB is too complex. SDs card can be switched to SPI mode, so this is your
> way.

OK.
>
> >6. The ability to transfer the stored data to a PC. If a USB memory
>
> -> #3
>
> >7. A real time clock
>
> There are plenty of i2c or spi rtc chips. The Philips/NXP PCF8583 and
> PCF8593 are popular and cheap ones.
>
> >8. Some mechanism to configure the device - for example the date and
> >time; this could be via a PC link or perhaps the use of on-board
> >switches and an LCD. If switches/LCD then the ability to drive an LCD
> >would be required. If a PC link then perhaps an RS232 interface, or
> >the use of the previously mentioned USB/Ethernet interfaces (but this
> >could perhaps make things a tad more complicated than they need to
> >be). Of course, I could provide both an on-board mechanism to
> >configure the device and a PC link.
>
> A serial port will be the easiest way.

OK.
>
> >9. Reasonable overall cost.
> >10. The availability of evaluation boards at perhaps $100 or less.
> >11. Free or cheap development tools
>
> If you go for AVR you don't need to buy anything. Grab AVRStudio from Atme=
l,
> the WinAVR GCC plus something like Ponyprog or avrdude for ISP programming=
.
> A parallel port programmer cable is easy to build. Or (better) obtain an
> AVRISPmk2 USB cable for 36$ (e.g. Digikey). If you want an eval board, go
> for the STK500. There are cheaper ones, but the STK500 is a programmer as
> well, and it is the only one to support high voltage programming, which yo=
u
> might need when messing around with the fuses.
>
> Mit freundlichen Gr=FC=DFen
>
> Frank-Christian Kr=FCgel

Thank you.

Mike

On May 4, 4:51=A0pm, Hans-Bernhard Br=F6ker <HBBroe...@t-online.de> wrote:
> AC Me wrote:
> > I believe about 2GB of data. Hence my desire to use an USB memory
> > stick, which was mentioned later in the post.
>
> It's quite certainly way outside your reach to implement a USB master.
> The power requirement would kill your battery lifetime, and the
> complexity of this part alone would dwarf the entire rest of the job.

OK. Although I'll have to learn about it sometime, I'll leave this for
another time.
>
> > Is there an alternative means to store 2GB of data?
>
> Any type of memory card: MMC, SD-in-MMC-mode, compact-flash cards. =A0You
> take your pick.
>
> > But this has an impact on how I connect to the device (the data
> > logger) for configuration purposes. The PC I am using to write this
> > does not have a 9-pin, or 15-pin, serial port.
>
> That's the least of your problems. =A0If you're going to program micros
> with that PC, you'll need a USB-to-RS232 converter anyway. =A0Use that to
> talk to the micro, and you're done.

These will add two extra components to the 'package' - A MMC reader
and an USB-to-RS232 adaptor. But the benefits would outweight the
'costs' as the learning part of the project would be simplified.

Take care.

Mike