32-Bit Microcontroller for New Project

Eric Smith wrote:
> larwe writes about the MPLAB C compiler for PIC32:
>> Optimization not available in the freeware compiler (nobody really
>> understands how they get away with this one on GPL grounds).
> 
> I guess I'm "nobody", since I understand it without difficulty.  Nothing
> in the GPL precludes defeaturing GPL'd software, provided that you meet
> the GPL terms.
> 
> They get away with it because they are fully in compliance with the GPL,
> which merely requires that if they distribute a binary built from modified
> sources, they have to provide the source code.  They do provide the source
> code; it's on their web site and there's even a link from the compiler
> product page.
> 
> Anyone can download that source code, "fix" the problem, and have a
> compiler with full optimization.  They could even distribute binaries
> or sources of that "fixed" compiler, provided that they meet the GPL
> requirements.
> 
> The "fix" is very simple.  Build it with a -DSKIP_LICENSE_MANAGER option
> on the command line.
> 
> Eric

Of course, that only applies to the compiler - as far as I know, (at 
least some of) their libraries can only be used with their pre-built 
binaries - either the free non-optimised version, or the paid-for full 
version.  Again, this is all perfectly legal and conforms to the GPL.

However, while they conform to the letter of the GPL, they are arguably 
going against the spirit of the GPL, and they are certainly going to 
annoy potential developers.  I don't mind paying a company for software 
that it writes, but I *do* object to companies going out of their way to 
make it hard to use free software written by other people.

>I'm about to embark on a new project that will require a 32-bit
>microcontroller. I've spent the last month evaluating the merits of
>the various choices architecturely, and have a pretty good idea of
>what's out there. It's come down to development environments, and I'd
>like to get some first-hand reports from people on this group.
>
>The three choices on my short-list are:
>
>Pic32 and MPLAB
>
>AVR32 and AVR32 Studio
>
>ARM7 and Rowley CrossStudio for ARM
>
>If anyone has any opinions on the relative merits of these three
>development environments (and the JTAG hardware that goes with them),
>I'd appreciate it.
>
>

I've worked with Rowley for the MSP430 and the ARM, and have only good
things to say about them.  Not only are the tools excellent, they give you
several extras which don't exist in all environments, the most important of
which is their excellent support.  Beyond that, they have a few nice things
which don't come everywhere:

1)  A very nice built-in tasking library, which I have used in several
projects (even on the MSP with its very limited resources).  
2)  Where the above wasn't appropriate (military apps with hard RT
requirements), there was a ready port to FreeRTOS.
3)  A set of debug_xxx functions, parallel to the functions in <stdio.h>
which allow sending debug messages (and write debug files, and even get
debug keyboard input) via the JTAG; this really helped out a lot of times,
especially where there was no debug UART available.

and again, fantastic support.

As for ARMs - they come in several shapes and sizes.  I much prefer the
AT91 with ample RAM to the LPC2000 where they were stingy with it.  Make
sure you know your needs first.

On 2008-09-09, sburck <sburck@netvision.net.il> wrote:
>>I'm about to embark on a new project that will require a 32-bit
>>microcontroller. I've spent the last month evaluating the merits of
>>the various choices architecturely, and have a pretty good idea of
>>what's out there. It's come down to development environments, and I'd
>>like to get some first-hand reports from people on this group.
>>
>>The three choices on my short-list are:
>>
>>Pic32 and MPLAB
>>
>>AVR32 and AVR32 Studio
>>
>>ARM7 and Rowley CrossStudio for ARM
>>
>>If anyone has any opinions on the relative merits of these three
>>development environments (and the JTAG hardware that goes with them),
>>I'd appreciate it.
>>
>>
>
> I've worked with Rowley for the MSP430 and the ARM, and have only good
> things to say about them.  Not only are the tools excellent, they give you
> several extras which don't exist in all environments, the most important of
> which is their excellent support.  Beyond that, they have a few nice things
> which don't come everywhere:

Most importantly: Linux support for when you want to switch to
a host system bred for software development instead of one
designed for showing power-point presentations.  ;)

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! Everywhere I look I
                                  at               see NEGATIVITY and ASPHALT
                               visi.com            ...

>> AVR32 and AVR32 Studio
> AVR32 Studio is Eclipse, which is full-featured but for my money very 
> slow.

Saw some studies on this.
Eclipse uses a lot of RAM. Minimum 1 GB, possibly 2 GB  is needed.
If you have too little RAM you would obviously be swapping = SLOW.

> The JTAG hardware is JTAG-ICE mk.II which is a rather finicky
> beast, at least when it's talking to other AVR parts; I haven't used
> it talking to an AVR32. When it works, it works fine, but it can get
> into a mood where disconnects, power-cycling target and emulator, and
> maybe even a reboot become necessary.

Quite often this is a problem with the flatcable connecting the JTAGICE Mk 
II
to the target. If the internal wires are flaky anything can happen.

There is now a new emulator available, AVRONE, which uses
high speed USB to connect to the target.
This also supports tracing.

-- 
Best Regards,
Ulf Samuelsson
This is intended to be my personal opinion which may,
or may not be shared by my employer Atmel Nordic AB 

> Most importantly: Linux support for when you want to switch to
> a host system bred for software development instead of one
> designed for showing power-point presentations. =A0;)

Why do you Linux fanbois always turn everything into dig against
Windows?

If it all came down to a steel cage match pitting Dave Cutler against
Torvalds, my money would be on Cutler.

On Sep 9, 10:40=A0am, "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> wrote:
> >> AVR32 and AVR32 Studio
> > AVR32 Studio is Eclipse, which is full-featured but for my money very
> > slow.
>
> Saw some studies on this.
> Eclipse uses a lot of RAM. Minimum 1 GB, possibly 2 GB =A0is needed.
> If you have too little RAM you would obviously be swapping =3D SLOW.

When I tried AVR Studio, I didn't notice any performance problems. I
do have an 8-processor machine with 16G of RAM, though, so I wouldn't
expect performance to be an issue.

I did have some issues, though, that I found annoying. Perhaps these
are related to my inexperience with the product, however:

1. The project builder seemingly compiles the source files making up a
project in a random order. It never seems to compile them in the same
order twice. This is extremely annoying when fixing syntax errors
followed by a rebuild to check the fixes.

2. The simulator seems flaky. There are times when it goes into the
weeds and requires a reset to fix. Why this happens with a simulator,
which the IDE has complete control over, I can't honestly fathom.

3. Several of the applications I tried running under the simulator
didn't stop at the main() function. Rather, the debugger just started
free running. Not even a breakpoint at the first executable line of
main() would tame it. I tried building the exact same code under MPLAB
and CrossStudio and did not experience this simulator runaway. I'm
very concerned that if the debugger is this flaky running a simulator,
how will it perform with real hardware?

On Sep 9, 1:40 pm, "Ulf Samuelsson" <u...@a-t-m-e-l.com> wrote:
> > AVR32 Studio is Eclipse, which is full-featured but for my money very
> > slow.
>
> Saw some studies on this.
> Eclipse uses a lot of RAM. Minimum 1 GB, possibly 2 GB  is needed.
> If you have too little RAM you would obviously be swapping = SLOW.

Eclipse is written in java and usually runs under a java VM.  But I
believe there has been some work done on compiling it to native code.
Would be interesting if that can be compatible with the AVR studio
additions.

sodaant@gmail.com wrote:

>> Most importantly: Linux support for when you want to switch to
>> a host system bred for software development instead of one
>> designed for showing power-point presentations. �;)
> 
> Why do you Linux fanbois always turn everything into dig against
> Windows?
> 
> If it all came down to a steel cage match pitting Dave Cutler against
> Torvalds, my money would be on Cutler.

Eh? Its you creating the fuss over Linux!!
In any case embedded Linux sells 3 million+ embedded Linux gadgets PER DAY.
About 270 billion dollars in annual sales.
So it is VERY pertinent question - and I'd rather listen to the Linux answer
than hear you whine.

Jim Granville wrote:

> sodaant@gmail.com wrote:
>> I'm about to embark on a new project that will require a 32-bit
>> microcontroller. I've spent the last month evaluating the merits of
>> the various choices architecturely, and have a pretty good idea of
>> what's out there. It's come down to development environments, and I'd
>> like to get some first-hand reports from people on this group.
>> 
>> The three choices on my short-list are:
>> 
>> Pic32 and MPLAB
>> 
>> AVR32 and AVR32 Studio
>> 
>> ARM7 and Rowley CrossStudio for ARM
>> 
>> If anyone has any opinions on the relative merits of these three
>> development environments (and the JTAG hardware that goes with them),
>> I'd appreciate it.
> 
> Here is another to add to your list :)
> 
> http://www.ti.com/piccolopr
> "Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI) (NYSE: TXN) today announced a new
> series of 32-bit TMS320F2802x/F2803x microcontrollers (MCU) starting at
> less than $2 in volume. The new Piccolo(TM) F2802x/F2803x
> microcontrollers feature architectural advancements and enhanced
> peripherals in package sizes starting at 38-pins to bring the benefits
> of 32-bit real-time control to applications typically unable to justify
> the associated cost."
> 
>   12 bit ADC and 150ps PWM, as well as a programmable, floating-point
> control law accelerator (CLA), make for an impressive embedded controller.


Thats nice - 12 bit ADC!
The only things that worry me at times having gone to one of their
meetings recently is their very public stance against Linux and
releasing everything as open source tools.
Personally I don't understand it.
They can acclerate their whole demand profile by focusing in on open
source tools instead of flaffing about on open source tool sets.

Op Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:22:26 +0200 schreef <sodaant@gmail.com>:
>> Most importantly: Linux support for when you want to switch to
>> a host system bred for software development instead of one
>> designed for showing power-point presentations. &#4294967295;;)
>
> Why do you Linux fanbois always turn everything into dig against
> Windows?

Q: What is the number one reason to use Linux?
A: Because it's not Windows.

> If it all came down to a steel cage match pitting Dave Cutler against
> Torvalds, my money would be on Cutler.

Some people are better at cage fighting and some people are better at  
designing operating systems.



-- 
Gemaakt met Opera's revolutionaire e-mailprogramma:  
http://www.opera.com/mail/