> ...
> Take a look at Xilinx XC9500XL family - similar to XC9500 family but
> low power. XL runs on 3.3v, but is 5 volt I/O tolerant. The
> XC95144XL looks like it will meet your requirements (it has 144 regs,
> 81 I/Os in TQFP-100 package), and it looks like it may meet your Icc
> requirements, too.
That might work, just be carefull with driving true 5V devices from the
CPLD. In fact, I am thinking about power switching an XC9536XL between
3.3V and 5V, to deal with the voltage translations. I have done it
with an AVR, not sure it it will work with the XC9536XL yet.
Reply by Hans●November 3, 20062006-11-03
"Paul Carpenter" <paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote in message
news:20061101.2303.321878snz@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk...
> On Wednesday, in article
> <4B82h.22186$j4.16516@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>
> hans64@ht-lab.com "Hans" wrote:
>
>>Hi Paul,
>>
>>Not sure if anybody mentioned it but I would also have a look Actel (e.g.
>>APA/A3E devices). Because they support military/avionics their devices are
>>not EOL'd so quickly, also some of their largest devices are available in
>>PQ240.
>
> Well it looks like some of the devices could do the job, but my quick look
> and the software seems a minefield of different applications and no real
> software overview (or even where it get device specific). Seeing thrid
> party support tools with Cadence and Mentor, gets scary on a very low
> production run ...
Hi Paul,
Not sure about the minefield, Actel's P&R is called Designer. The third
party tools are Modelsim for simulation (same for ISE/Quartus/ispLever) and
Synplicity for synthesis. All these tools are called/invoked from Libero
which is their development environment. I have no experience with Libero but
I understand that Libero gold is free and allow you to target devices up to
a million "marketing gates". I only use Designer and although it is much
slower than ISE/Quartus it is quite easy to use. See the link below for a
simple design I implemented on their ProASIC+ prototype board,
http://www.ht-lab.com/freecores/pingpong/pingpong.htm
Regards,
Hans.
www.ht-lab.com
>
>>Just a thought,
>
> Appreciated and looking at everyone's suggestions as a broad search helps
> especially when I might not have experience of some vendors' tools, or
> best
> ways to obtain them.
>
>>Hans.
>>www.ht-lab.com
>>
>>
>>"Paul Carpenter" <paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:20061101.1341.321856snz@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk...
>>>I know others here have to deal with long life time support of designs,
>>>and
>>>I
>>> have one where I ahev to also supply the tools (free or paid) so that
>>> customer
>>> can support in at least 10 years time. The trouble is the design
>>> necessitates
>>> a PLD/CPLD/FPGA, so the requirements get quite onerous....
>>>
>>> Device
> ..
>
> --
> Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
> <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
> <http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 & mailing list info
> <http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate
>
Reply by Mike Harrison●November 3, 20062006-11-03
On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 14:33:16 +0000 (GMT), paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk (Paul Carpenter) wrote:
>On Thursday, in article
> <uhejk2ltidps9p9etbcivre26c3di0okes@4ax.com>
> mike@whitewing.co.uk "Mike Harrison" wrote:
>
>>>>The restriction on size is silly - just get a 2 GB flash drive.
>>>
>>>Consider the market the customer is in respecifying that part which has
>>>been agreed upon is going to be a costly exercise adding at least 3 months
>>>to project.
>>
>>How exactly does "Buy a bigger flash drive for anouther $20 or so" add 3 months
>> to a project?
>
>When several organisations are involved in the chain and half of them
>are aerospace, getting things that have been specified changed takes
>time and a LOT of paperwork.
Maybe the spec should have been simplified to "a sufficiently large drive..." instead of specifiying
it explicitly..!
Or if it's more about approving specific devices, would "just use 2 of them" be an easier option...
Reply by David Brown●November 3, 20062006-11-03
Paul Carpenter wrote:
> On Thursday, in article
> <uhejk2ltidps9p9etbcivre26c3di0okes@4ax.com>
> mike@whitewing.co.uk "Mike Harrison" wrote:
>
>>>> The restriction on size is silly - just get a 2 GB flash drive.
>>> Consider the market the customer is in respecifying that part which has
>>> been agreed upon is going to be a costly exercise adding at least 3 months
>>> to project.
>> How exactly does "Buy a bigger flash drive for anouther $20 or so" add 3 months
>> to a project?
>
> When several organisations are involved in the chain and half of them
> are aerospace, getting things that have been specified changed takes
> time and a LOT of paperwork.
>
It sounds very much like this project is being run backwards. Petty
decisions like the size and medium for archiving are decided in advance,
while real, important decisions like the tools and devices are left
until later.
Reply by ●November 2, 20062006-11-02
On 2 Nov, in article
<1162483108.159431.42200@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>
vze24h5m@verizon.net wrote:
>Paul Carpenter wrote:
>> On Wednesday, in article
>> <4B82h.22186$j4.16516@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>
>> hans64@ht-lab.com "Hans" wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Paul,
>> >
>> >Not sure if anybody mentioned it but I would also have a look Actel (e.g.
>> >APA/A3E devices). Because they support military/avionics their devices are
>> >not EOL'd so quickly, also some of their largest devices are available in
>> >PQ240.
>>
>> Well it looks like some of the devices could do the job, but my quick look
>> and the software seems a minefield of different applications and no real
>> software overview (or even where it get device specific). Seeing thrid
>> party support tools with Cadence and Mentor, gets scary on a very low
>> production run ...
>>
>> >Just a thought,
>>
>> Appreciated and looking at everyone's suggestions as a broad search helps
>> especially when I might not have experience of some vendors' tools, or best
>> ways to obtain them.
>>
>> >Hans.
>> >www.ht-lab.com
>> >
>> >
>> >"Paul Carpenter" <paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >news:20061101.1341.321856snz@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk...
>> >>I know others here have to deal with long life time support of designs, and
>> >>I
>> >> have one where I ahev to also supply the tools (free or paid) so that
>> >> customer
>> >> can support in at least 10 years time. The trouble is the design
>> >> necessitates
>> >> a PLD/CPLD/FPGA, so the requirements get quite onerous....
>> >>
>> >> Device
>> ..
>>
>Paul;
>Take a look at Xilinx XC9500XL family - similar to XC9500 family but
>low power. XL runs on 3.3v, but is 5 volt I/O tolerant. The
>XC95144XL looks like it will meet your requirements (it has 144 regs,
>81 I/Os in TQFP-100 package), and it looks like it may meet your Icc
>requirements, too. 9500XL is also cheaper than 9500, but for 10 units
>I don't suppose that matters.
Thanks will look at it as the XC9500 looked close.
>As others have suggested, use older versions of Xilinx's ISE.
After umptten survey forms eventually managed to find the pages, will
look at trying an older version shortly.
> ISE 8.x is so bleeping big that it doen't
>fit on a CD - only on a DVD.
> On Wednesday, in article
> <4B82h.22186$j4.16516@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>
> hans64@ht-lab.com "Hans" wrote:
>
> >Hi Paul,
> >
> >Not sure if anybody mentioned it but I would also have a look Actel (e.g.
> >APA/A3E devices). Because they support military/avionics their devices are
> >not EOL'd so quickly, also some of their largest devices are available in
> >PQ240.
>
> Well it looks like some of the devices could do the job, but my quick look
> and the software seems a minefield of different applications and no real
> software overview (or even where it get device specific). Seeing thrid
> party support tools with Cadence and Mentor, gets scary on a very low
> production run ...
>
> >Just a thought,
>
> Appreciated and looking at everyone's suggestions as a broad search helps
> especially when I might not have experience of some vendors' tools, or best
> ways to obtain them.
>
> >Hans.
> >www.ht-lab.com
> >
> >
> >"Paul Carpenter" <paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:20061101.1341.321856snz@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk...
> >>I know others here have to deal with long life time support of designs, and
> >>I
> >> have one where I ahev to also supply the tools (free or paid) so that
> >> customer
> >> can support in at least 10 years time. The trouble is the design
> >> necessitates
> >> a PLD/CPLD/FPGA, so the requirements get quite onerous....
> >>
> >> Device
> ..
>
> --
> Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
> <http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
> <http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 & mailing list info
> <http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate
Paul;
Take a look at Xilinx XC9500XL family - similar to XC9500 family but
low power. XL runs on 3.3v, but is 5 volt I/O tolerant. The
XC95144XL looks like it will meet your requirements (it has 144 regs,
81 I/Os in TQFP-100 package), and it looks like it may meet your Icc
requirements, too. 9500XL is also cheaper than 9500, but for 10 units
I don't suppose that matters. As others have suggested, use older
versions of Xilinx's ISE. ISE 8.x is so bleeping big that it doen't
fit on a CD - only on a DVD.
HTH
-Dave Pollum
Reply by Meindert Sprang●November 2, 20062006-11-02
"Paul Carpenter" <paul$@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> wrote in message
news:20061102.1433.321913snz@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk...
> When several organisations are involved in the chain and half of them
> are aerospace, getting things that have been specified changed takes
> time and a LOT of paperwork.
And how did a flash drive come into this picture? Typical data retention is
about 10 years.....
Meindert
Reply by ●November 2, 20062006-11-02
On Thursday, in article
<uhejk2ltidps9p9etbcivre26c3di0okes@4ax.com>
mike@whitewing.co.uk "Mike Harrison" wrote:
>>>The restriction on size is silly - just get a 2 GB flash drive.
>>
>>Consider the market the customer is in respecifying that part which has
>>been agreed upon is going to be a costly exercise adding at least 3 months
>>to project.
>
>How exactly does "Buy a bigger flash drive for anouther $20 or so" add 3 months
> to a project?
When several organisations are involved in the chain and half of them
are aerospace, getting things that have been specified changed takes
time and a LOT of paperwork.
--
Paul Carpenter | paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
<http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 & mailing list info
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate
Reply by ●November 2, 20062006-11-02
On Thursday, in article <4549b1aa$1@clear.net.nz>
no.spam@designtools.maps.co.nz "Jim Granville" wrote:
>Jim Granville wrote:
>> Aside: Your spec does not call for _operate_ from flash drive, but that
>> should be possible.
>> I have not tested WinCUPL (command Line) running from a FlashDrive yet,
>> but size will not be a problem, and I know Text Editors can run from
>> Flash Drives. When I get my flash drive back from the borrower, I'll
>> try it sometime. Might slow the 1-2 second compile times, to 5-10
>> seconds... ?
>
>I've tried an Atmel WinCUPL Flash drive install/Run, with these results:
>
>Yes, it all works fine.
>
>Compile times: Slightly slower. Takes appx 2 seconds for Compile/Sim/JED
>create, from Flash drive. ~266K project directory
>
>ZIPed sized :
> Functional Editor : 533K
> Functional WinCUPL\Shared : 3.17MB ( under 1% of OP's 400MB target )
>
>Unzipped sizes:
> Text Editor: 1.4MB
> WinCupl : 8.21MB
>
>So, a target of _operate_ from FLASH drive looks quite do-able and that
>has to give more design-longevity, as then you only have to find a
>machine with a USB port to quickly try it. So your pool of candidates is
>suddenly much larger.
>Probably be good for 20+ years of design life ?
Thanks for the information, keeping options open, is what I am trying to
do with so many other constraints.
> On Wed, 01 Nov 2006 07:56:32 -0800, linnix wrote:
>
>
>>>Device
>>> 100 registers min
>>> 50 I/O min
>>> Surface mount as TQFP/PQFP/PLCC
>>> (i.e. NOT BGA etc..)
>>> 5V I/O or tolerant I/O
>>> Fastest clock is currently 25MHz
>>> Less than 80mA total Icc
>>> (not all sections operating at same time)
>>> Flash or EEPROM programming (no RAM devices)
>>
>>XC95108 should cover all.
>>
>
>
> The XC95108 looks like it will exceed the 80mA spec. CoolRunner XPLA3
> has 5V tolerant IO and is lower current. I had a brief look at coolrunner
> II, but it doesn't look like it had the 5V tolerant I/O.
Atmel's ATF1508ASL ?
>
>
>>As stated from another post, wrong decision.
>>
>
>
> Although quite a lot of hardware engineers don't know vhdl, or use it so
> infrequently it's more productive to use schematic capture, with logic
> symbols that all hardware engineers understand.
IF they can load it ! - given the OPs desire for a long design-life, one
simple litmus test, is to look back ten+ years, and try and find
both a Trained Engineer and Design that can load any of those 10 year
old SCH designs into todays tools, or find a 10 year old SCH+license
that works on todays PCs.
Ask a sample of HW Engineers if they can understand this code snippet :
PIN 38 = RegQ0;
PIN 34 = RegQ1;
RegQ0.ck = OscBN;
RegQ1.ck = OscBN;
RegQ0.t = 'b'1;
RegQ1.t = RegQ0;
No, it is not VHDL - for CPLDs that's not really required.
>
> Of course there are disadvantages, one that I have come across more than
> once is that a hardware engineer may consider all nets on the schematic to
> have propagation delays similar to wired board, when in fact they don't.
In modern FPGAs, routing delays now dominate, so there is a grain of
truth in this.
-jg