rickman wrote:
 > It is more like a flexible peripheral.  Heck the
> programming doesn't take Mbits or even Kbits, it is done through a few
> registers for each section.

  A while ago I went looking for the detail, of the claimed 
"programmable" - seems that's actually marketing spin for "configurable".

  Something that is setup thru a few registers is not quite a 
"programmble system on a chip" to me, better called a "configurable 
peripheral".

  I see your words are "flexible peripheral", so we are closer in 
agreement; neither of us uses the Cypress hype "Programmble System on a 
Chip PSoC".

  Can it do something simple, like a quadrature U/D counter ?
Or maybe an IrDA UART ?

-jg

rickman wrote:
> I think you are going in the wrong direction when you compare the PSOC
> to an FPGA or CPLD.  

Let's see - oh, yes, here it is, earlier in this thread... :)

rickman wrote:
> Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
> have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
> as good as an MCU and a CPLD!

Jim Granville wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> >
> > I don't get your position.  You think the PSOC devices are not of much
> > value and the PLD in the ADUC is a valuable thing?
>
>   No, I think the PSoC is somewhat overhyped, and I observed that
> the hyped elements have been morphing 'simpler', over time, and
> more STD HW blocks are being added (not the opposite trend)
> and gave a recent Cypress PSoC example.

I think you are smoking the weed!  Your "trend" is one new device.  Any
time a significant market exists, it is better to address it with a
dedicated design than a programmable one.  I don't get why you are
criticizing the PSOC.  The fact that they offer other, slightly
different devices does not detract from the PSOCs flexibility.


>   I like the High voltage features of the PSoC device I was quoting.

Ok, so then you like it.


>   All I said of the ADUC was that it has a "small 'PLD'" - just two words.

Yes, two words.  I am saying it is nearly worthless and is not really
useful in this discussion.

>   I will look at the ARM PSoC, when released, as one big drawback of the
> present ones, is the orphan core.

Yes, and the dated, chip based emulator is another drawback.


>   My overall opinion of mixing Microcontrollers and Logic on one "System
> on a Chip" is luke-warm.
>
>   The problem is matching the respective uC:CPLD powers, and tools.
> Anyone remember Triscend ? - or Atmel's FPslic ?

I remember the V2Pro with multiple PowerPC in the FPGA. So clearly the
combination can be a commercial success.

For a lot of the designs I work on, the PSOC concept is perfect.  A
better core would be good, but the peripherals is what the PSOC is
really about.  Heck even chips like the MSP430 are going with more
flexible peripherals. Their newest chips use flexible peripherals that
can be configured for different protocols, similar to the flexibility
of the PSOC.

I think you are going in the wrong direction when you compare the PSOC
to an FPGA or CPLD.  It is more like a flexible peripheral.  Heck the
programming doesn't take Mbits or even Kbits, it is done through a few
registers for each section.

rickman wrote:
> 
> I don't get your position.  You think the PSOC devices are not of much
> value and the PLD in the ADUC is a valuable thing?

  No, I think the PSoC is somewhat overhyped, and I observed that
the hyped elements have been morphing 'simpler', over time, and
more STD HW blocks are being added (not the opposite trend)
and gave a recent Cypress PSoC example.

  I like the High voltage features of the PSoC device I was quoting.

  All I said of the ADUC was that it has a "small 'PLD'" - just two words.

  I will look at the ARM PSoC, when released, as one big drawback of the 
present ones, is the orphan core.

  My overall opinion of mixing Microcontrollers and Logic on one "System 
on a Chip" is luke-warm.

  The problem is matching the respective uC:CPLD powers, and tools.
Anyone remember Triscend ? - or Atmel's FPslic ?


-jg

Jim Granville wrote:
> rickman wrote:
>
> > Jim Granville wrote:
> >
> >>rickman wrote:
> >>
> >>>Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
> >>>have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
> >>>as good as an MCU and a CPLD!
> >>
> >>  Yes, but will you be able to 'get at' the 'CPLD' portion ? - their
> >>PSoC claimed many things, but was very light on the details, ( I see now
> >>they claim 'No Code' development!), and they moved to more common
> >>peripherals on the newer variants.
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean about the newer peripherals.  They all have
> > the same structure as far as I am aware.  There is one hardware I2C
> > port, but I think that is because it has some special functions.
>
> Yes, it was too complex for their Digtal Blocks! :)
>
> I'm looking at CY8C41123, and I can see ADC 20ksps and DAC, not in their
> Analog blocks, but as Std functions, and the Digital Blocks that
> are there, make no claims at all about UART/SPI abilities, just
> 8/16 bit timers/counters. Whoop-de-do, to a sum total of 32 bits - looks
> like any vanilla uC there, even lighter than some with just 4 bytes of
> timers. [no mention of pwm ?]
>
> Yes, I think they can mux to any pin, so I'd call that a TimerBlock +
> better class of MUX.

This is not a standard PSOC, it is a "Linear Power PSoC=99 Device" and
is "a cost-reduced version of the CY8C42x23 that targets linear-control
applications."  You make it sound like the part is junk!  Cypress has
always targeted cost sensitive applications and they produce a wide
range of devices to optimize the cost.  This is just another part in a
complex MCU market.

> >>  AnalogDevices have ARMs with a small 'PLD' in now.
> >
> >
> > Calling the logic in the ADUC7000 a PLD is doing the programmable logic
> > world a disservice.  I take it you have never looked at this "small
> > PLD"?  While you can build UARTs, SPI ports, and even more complex
> > things in the PSOC devices (not to mention the analog functions), I
> > have not figured out just what I could use the ADUC7000 logic for.
>
> you'll see I did call it a small 'PLD'.

Yes, and I don't think you realize that I think that is an
overstatement.  It is so primative that I don't know how it could be of
much use.  I thought it was a great idea until I read about it and
found it has very little real value.


> In the ADuC702x data, they claim 16ip and 14op, so that's a vanilla
> 16V14 pld(PLA), and it can Signal MUX, or start the ADC. Could be
> usefull for feeding multiple freqency sources into a single timer.
> ADuC702x timers have more resolution than the PsOC.

No, it is *nothing* like a 16V14.  Read the description of what logic
it contains and you will be surprised too.  Yes, you might be able to
use it as some 2 to 1 muxes.  Whoo hoo!

I don't get your position.  You think the PSOC devices are not of much
value and the PLD in the ADUC is a valuable thing?

rickman wrote:

> Jim Granville wrote:
> 
>>rickman wrote:
>>
>>>Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
>>>have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
>>>as good as an MCU and a CPLD!
>>
>>  Yes, but will you be able to 'get at' the 'CPLD' portion ? - their
>>PSoC claimed many things, but was very light on the details, ( I see now
>>they claim 'No Code' development!), and they moved to more common
>>peripherals on the newer variants.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean about the newer peripherals.  They all have
> the same structure as far as I am aware.  There is one hardware I2C
> port, but I think that is because it has some special functions.

Yes, it was too complex for their Digtal Blocks! :)

I'm looking at CY8C41123, and I can see ADC 20ksps and DAC, not in their
Analog blocks, but as Std functions, and the Digital Blocks that
are there, make no claims at all about UART/SPI abilities, just
8/16 bit timers/counters. Whoop-de-do, to a sum total of 32 bits - looks 
like any vanilla uC there, even lighter than some with just 4 bytes of 
timers. [no mention of pwm ?]

Yes, I think they can mux to any pin, so I'd call that a TimerBlock + 
better class of MUX.


> 
>>  AnalogDevices have ARMs with a small 'PLD' in now.
> 
> 
> Calling the logic in the ADUC7000 a PLD is doing the programmable logic
> world a disservice.  I take it you have never looked at this "small
> PLD"?  While you can build UARTs, SPI ports, and even more complex
> things in the PSOC devices (not to mention the analog functions), I
> have not figured out just what I could use the ADUC7000 logic for.

you'll see I did call it a small 'PLD'.

In the ADuC702x data, they claim 16ip and 14op, so that's a vanilla 
16V14 pld(PLA), and it can Signal MUX, or start the ADC. Could be 
usefull for feeding multiple freqency sources into a single timer.
ADuC702x timers have more resolution than the PsOC.

-jg

Jim Granville wrote:
> rickman wrote:
> > Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
> > have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
> > as good as an MCU and a CPLD!
>
>   Yes, but will you be able to 'get at' the 'CPLD' portion ? - their
> PSoC claimed many things, but was very light on the details, ( I see now
> they claim 'No Code' development!), and they moved to more common
> peripherals on the newer variants.

I'm not sure what you mean about the newer peripherals.  They all have
the same structure as far as I am aware.  There is one hardware I2C
port, but I think that is because it has some special functions.

>   AnalogDevices have ARMs with a small 'PLD' in now.

Calling the logic in the ADUC7000 a PLD is doing the programmable logic
world a disservice.  I take it you have never looked at this "small
PLD"?  While you can build UARTs, SPI ports, and even more complex
things in the PSOC devices (not to mention the analog functions), I
have not figured out just what I could use the ADUC7000 logic for.

rickman wrote:
> Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
> have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
> as good as an MCU and a CPLD!

  Yes, but will you be able to 'get at' the 'CPLD' portion ? - their 
PSoC claimed many things, but was very light on the details, ( I see now 
they claim 'No Code' development!), and they moved to more common 
peripherals on the newer variants.

  AnalogDevices have ARMs with a small 'PLD' in now.

-jg

Tom Lucas wrote:
> "rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > Who am I to argue with your requirements, but you might reconsider the
> > need for an 8 bit bus.  These days most I/O is done directly from the
> > MCU or if expansion is needed, using SPI or I2C.  If you tell us what
> > you need on the other end of the 8 bit bus maybe we can help you see
> > how easy it is to use one of the serial interfaces.
> >
> > This is an issue because adding a data and address bus to an MCU
> > greatly increases the pin count and package size and therefore cost.
>
> You are right in what you say and realistically I could probably do away
> with a lot of the latches and flip-flops that expect 8 bit busses
> (probably into an FPGA). However, I am only intending to replace the
> processor area of an existing and working design and don't want too much
> upheaval. It's less than ideal I know but gettign management to move
> away from 80188 will be hard enough without having to redo the rest of
> the system.

If you are using latches and FFs, you likely can find ways to roll that
into the MCU if you think about it a bit.

Cypress has been talking to me about their planned ARM parts that will
have the PSOC peripherals.  That will be an amazing combination, almost
as good as an MCU and a CPLD!


> > I also don't think you will
> > find 5 years to be a problem for a product lifetime since nearly all
> > the ARM MCUs are relatively new and in high demand.
>
> I think a lot of the longevity depends on large (probably automotive)
> manufacturers adopting the microcontroller in question.

I think you will find that most ARM makers are shipping plenty of parts
and you can expect the quantities to continue for many years.  With
several big semiconductor players adopting the ARM as their primary MCU
to market, this has push the architecture to the forefront in a way
that will be even stronger than the 8051 MCU.  The chips being made
today are very good with very low power and high degrees of efficiency
and robustness so they will still be in products for many years.
Certainly if you go with one of the two big players, Atmel and NXP, you
will be able to buy these chips for many years.  I don't think they
need an automotive partner.  In fact, the automotive market likely will
move on to newer chips since with their volumes a savings of just a few
cents justifies changing to a different part.


> > One observation, if you want lower power chips, Atmel and NXP
> > (Philips)
> > are about neck and neck with roughly half the power consumption of the
> > other vendors.  These parts will actually run at lower power than many
> > 8 bit cores when you run them at the same speed.  This is due to the
> > smaller process geometries.
>
> I have oodles of power available so that is one restriction I can be
> free of.

Yes, some apps don't care about power consumption, but there can also
be power dissapation issues, but I expect you don't have that
limitation either.  If you were using the old technology you mentioned,
you will find the new parts to be a lot more size efficient too.

Tom Lucas wrote:

> "rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message 
>>Who am I to argue with your requirements, but you might reconsider the
>>need for an 8 bit bus.  These days most I/O is done directly from the
>>MCU or if expansion is needed, using SPI or I2C.  If you tell us what
>>you need on the other end of the 8 bit bus maybe we can help you see
>>how easy it is to use one of the serial interfaces.
>>
>>This is an issue because adding a data and address bus to an MCU
>>greatly increases the pin count and package size and therefore cost.
> 
> 
> You are right in what you say and realistically I could probably do away 
> with a lot of the latches and flip-flops that expect 8 bit busses 
> (probably into an FPGA). However, I am only intending to replace the 
> processor area of an existing and working design and don't want too much 
> upheaval. It's less than ideal I know but gettign management to move 
> away from 80188 will be hard enough without having to redo the rest of 
> the system.

In this situation you could look at a CPLD that does ARM_SPI or ARM_SSC 
to legacy-parallel bus, for the external latch-sea.
SPI speeds can match the MHz region 188BUS IO, and you open up more 
choices in the Processor front, plus save a lot of PCB traces and EMC
headaches  - you can even optoisolate the SPI link.

-jg