>>> I certainly recognize that SPI is going to limit the transfer speeds
>>> possible. The advantage to SPI is that it is available. The other
>>> possibility from my perspective is a high speed serial port (SPORT,
>>> not a UART).
>>
>> Ah, Blackfin.
>
> Close, actually SHARC.

Yes, I should have read your website first.

>> You might consider using a PIC? There are a number of CF designs
>> (hardware and software) floating around for a PIC (e.g.
>> http://www.armanet.com/schematic.pdf). You might slightly adapt one
>> of those and the SPI interface on the PIC. You'd have to proxy the
>> various I/O operations (with some intelligence) between SPI<>CF.
>> [Replace PIC with AVR/8051 depending on personal preference.]
>
> I thought of this idea as well but I think I would probably use an
> FPGA instead just to make the interface fast. The advantage to CF is
> that it can be much faster than MMC. With a SPORT, I can transfer raw
> data at 50Mbit/sec.

When I used CF cards I found quite a wide variation in the (write) speeds:
ultimately you are dependent on the controller on the card.

    Andrew

> I looked at MMC/SD cards for the first time today. These cards are
> incredibily easy to interface with a SPI port. I guess I will probably
> forget about CF cards.

You also minimize the amount of extra circuitry that you need.

> I also was referred to a part (Fatfile) that Saelig (www.saelig.com)
> sells that alloes SPI to IDE and other interfaces.

That's neat: ARM not PIC.

    Andrew

"Andrew Jackson" <alj@nospam.com> wrote in
news:CcSdnZhEQ-ewLe7eRVnyjA@eclipse.net.uk: 

>>>> Does anyone have a source (or design) for a CF reader with a SPI
>>>> interface? An alternative would be a card that had at least 256M
>>>> Bytes of SDRAM.
>>>>
>>>> The SPI interface on this card would be configured as a slave.
>>>
>>> CF is quite fast but transfer speed will be decrased by SPI. That's
>>> why it's better to use MMC cards,which can work without problems
>>> with SPI bus.
>>>
>>
>> I certainly recognize that SPI is going to limit the transfer speeds
>> possible. The advantage to SPI is that it is available. The other
>> possibility from my perspective is a high speed serial port (SPORT,
>> not a UART).
> 
> Ah, Blackfin.

Close, actually SHARC. 



> 
>> I want to interface to a DSP where I don't have a parallel data bus
>> available.
> 
> You might consider using a PIC? There are a number of CF designs
> (hardware and software) floating around for a PIC (e.g.
> http://www.armanet.com/schematic.pdf). You might slightly adapt one of
> those and the SPI interface on the PIC. You'd have to proxy the
> various I/O operations (with some intelligence) between SPI<>CF.
> [Replace PIC with AVR/8051 depending on personal preference.]

I thought of this idea as well but I think I would probably use an FPGA 
instead just to make the interface fast. The advantage to CF is that it 
can be much faster than MMC. With a SPORT, I can transfer raw data at 
50Mbit/sec.



-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

"Andrew Jackson" <alj@nospam.com> wrote in
news:CcSdnZhEQ-ewLe7eRVnyjA@eclipse.net.uk: 

>>>> Does anyone have a source (or design) for a CF reader with a SPI
>>>> interface? An alternative would be a card that had at least 256M
>>>> Bytes of SDRAM.
>>>>
>>>> The SPI interface on this card would be configured as a slave.
>>>
>>> CF is quite fast but transfer speed will be decrased by SPI. That's
>>> why it's better to use MMC cards,which can work without problems
>>> with SPI bus.
>>>
>>
>> I certainly recognize that SPI is going to limit the transfer speeds
>> possible. The advantage to SPI is that it is available. The other
>> possibility from my perspective is a high speed serial port (SPORT,
>> not a UART).
> 
> Ah, Blackfin.
> 
>> I want to interface to a DSP where I don't have a parallel data bus
>> available.
> 
> You might consider using a PIC? There are a number of CF designs
> (hardware and software) floating around for a PIC (e.g.
> http://www.armanet.com/schematic.pdf). You might slightly adapt one of
> those and the SPI interface on the PIC. You'd have to proxy the
> various I/O operations (with some intelligence) between SPI<>CF.
> [Replace PIC with AVR/8051 depending on personal preference.]
> 
>     Andrew
> 
> 
> 

I looked at MMC/SD cards for the first time today. These cards are 
incredibily easy to interface with a SPI port. I guess I will probably 
forget about CF cards. 

I also was referred to a part (Fatfile) that Saelig (www.saelig.com) 
sells that alloes SPI to IDE and other interfaces.

Thanks for all the comments.

 

-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

>>> Does anyone have a source (or design) for a CF reader with a SPI
>>> interface? An alternative would be a card that had at least 256M
>>> Bytes of SDRAM.
>>>
>>> The SPI interface on this card would be configured as a slave.
>>
>> CF is quite fast but transfer speed will be decrased by SPI. That's
>> why it's better to use MMC cards,which can work without problems with
>> SPI bus.
>>
>
> I certainly recognize that SPI is going to limit the transfer speeds
> possible. The advantage to SPI is that it is available. The other
> possibility from my perspective is a high speed serial port (SPORT,
> not a UART).

Ah, Blackfin.

> I want to interface to a DSP where I don't have a parallel data bus
> available.

You might consider using a PIC? There are a number of CF designs (hardware
and software) floating around for a PIC (e.g.
http://www.armanet.com/schematic.pdf). You might slightly adapt one of those
and the SPI interface on the PIC. You'd have to proxy the various I/O
operations (with some intelligence) between SPI<>CF. [Replace PIC with
AVR/8051 depending on personal preference.]

    Andrew

"Dominik Doma&#4294967295;ski" <d_domanski@tlen.pl> wrote in
news:dkvu3u$t4f$1@srv.cyf-kr.edu.pl: 

>> Does anyone have a source (or design) for a CF reader with a SPI
> interface?
>> An alternative would be a card that had at least 256M Bytes of SDRAM.
>>
>> The SPI interface on this card would be configured as a slave.
> 
> CF is quite fast but transfer speed will be decrased by SPI. That's
> why it's better to use MMC cards,which can work without problems with
> SPI bus. 
> 

I certainly recognize that SPI is going to limit the transfer speeds 
possible. The advantage to SPI is that it is available. The other 
possibility from my perspective is a high speed serial port (SPORT, not a 
UART).

I want to interface to a DSP where I don't have a parallel data bus 
available.





-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com

> Does anyone have a source (or design) for a CF reader with a SPI
interface?
> An alternative would be a card that had at least 256M Bytes of SDRAM.
>
> The SPI interface on this card would be configured as a slave.

CF is quite fast but transfer speed will be decrased by SPI. That's why it's
better to use MMC cards,which can work without problems with SPI bus.

Dominik Domanski
d_domanski@NO_SPAMtlen.pl

Does anyone have a source (or design) for a CF reader with a SPI interface? 
An alternative would be a card that had at least 256M Bytes of SDRAM.

The SPI interface on this card would be configured as a slave.



-- 
Al Clark
Danville Signal Processing, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Purveyors of Fine DSP Hardware and other Cool Stuff
Available at http://www.danvillesignal.com