Throw another $25 ARM dev board (with programmable analogue & digital) in the mix - PSoC 4 Pioneer Kit

[ivanjh]

http://www.cypress.com/?rID=77780

I'm really interested in the programmable digital blocks of this device.

I'm guessing you'd have to lay your hands on it and try some scenarios to get a feel for the "size" of the programmable section.

But the current array of "components" seems like a nice start http://www.cypress.com/?id=4749&rtID=377

Has anyone tried to use one of these in the real world?

Regards,

Ivan

[tALSit de CoD]

That's like Nick Johnson's Loki! Only Loki is better: http://www.arachnidlabs.com/blog/2013/01/22/introducing-loki/

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Robots & Dinosaurs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sydney-hackspa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sydney-h...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sydney-hackspace?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Nick Johnson]

It is indeed the same line of chips. As a result, I'm considering very seriously whether or not I should continue with the Loki or not.

The Pioneer is based on the new PSoC 4, which is an Arm Cortex M0. Cypress haven't released much in the way of details on these processors, let alone datasheets, yet. They could be very cool Arduino-substitutes. There's also a PSoC 5 on the Pioneer board, serving purely as a program and debug chip(!). Plus, the whole board is $25, a price only Cypress could afford to manufacture it at, given the retail price of their chips (PSoC 5 chips range from about $8 - $30 in small-medium quantities).

The Loki is based on the PSoC 5, which is an Arm Cortex M3. It doesn't have onboard debug, instead using a bootloader, and I was planning to price it at about $50. Loki does have a very cool (if I say so myself) expansion header system for planks/shields.

As you can imagine, this isn't a great position for Loki to be in - way more expensive, without onboard debug, and third-party. I'm thinking hard about whether to proceed with it.

That said, I'm really excited about the Pioneer and the potential to get more people using PSoCs; they're very cool chips. I've preordered one. :)

-Nick

[Nick Johnson]

Turns out Cypress just released preliminary datasheets for the first two ranges of PSoC 4: http://www.cypress.com/?id=4749

The 4100 has no programmable digital blocks, two built in opamps, two reconfigurable serial blocks, and the usual accessories (ADC, DAC). It's thus way less configurable than most PSoCs, but still more so than other ARMs, since you can route any GPIO to any function, not to mention make good use of the built in opamps.

The 4100 has four programmable digital blocks (the PSoC 5s have 20+), which is nevertheless enough for a decent amount of reconfigurability. 

More importantly, they're _way_ cheaper than the PSoC 3 or 5 range. The 4200s are priced at a little under $2; the cheapest PSoC 5 is about $7.

I think there's a lot of potential for arduino-scale dev boards here. I can't wait to see what the other ranges support - particularly if USB is included.

-Nick

[Keith Franks]

If one assumed that I didn't understand a single word in the above email, what would be the best device to start with?

[Nick Johnson]

I'd start by getting the Pioneer board. It's Arduino compatible, easy to work with, and has limited numbers of the same features that its bigger brothers have.

Looking at the newly released specs, I'm beginning to think that Loki might have a life as the PSoC equivalent of the Arduino Mega - but only if I can figure out a way to have onboard debug (but I can't see a way to do that affordably).

-Nick

[ada]

On Apr 26, 6:11 pm, Nick Johnson <arach...@notdot.net> wrote:

> The 4100 has no programmable digital blocks, two built in opamps, two

> The 4100 has four programmable digital blocks (the PSoC 5s have 20+), which

.... I'm confused.

[ada]

On Apr 26, 6:18 pm, Nick Johnson <arach...@notdot.net> wrote:
> Looking at the newly released specs, I'm beginning to think that Loki might
> have a life as the PSoC equivalent of the Arduino Mega - but only if I can
> figure out a way to have onboard debug (but I can't see a way to do that
> affordably).

Have a SWD port. Use a Pioneer to provide the actual debugger.

-A

[Nick Johnson]

Typo, the second line should say "4200".

-Nick

[Nick Johnson]

I'll definitely include a Miniprog3 compatible header; but I'm not sure how easy it would be to use a Pioneer (or another Loki) as a programmer - Cypress hasn't released the source for their program/debug firmware as far as I'm aware.

-Nick

[ada]

On May 1, 9:04 pm, Nick Johnson <arach...@notdot.net> wrote:
> I'll definitely include a Miniprog3 compatible header; but I'm not sure how
> easy it would be to use a Pioneer (or another Loki) as a programmer -
> Cypress hasn't released the source for their program/debug firmware as far
> as I'm aware.

There are two headers on the pioneer:
- one to program the PSoC5 (and there are some extra gpios)
- one to program external devices from the PSoC5

I don't see why you can't hook up the loki to the second port, unless
cypress has crippled the firmware into only programming PSoc4s.

[Nick Johnson]

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 3:03 PM, ada <a...@panda2.net> wrote:

On May 1, 9:04 pm, Nick Johnson <arach...@notdot.net> wrote:
> I'll definitely include a Miniprog3 compatible header; but I'm not sure how
> easy it would be to use a Pioneer (or another Loki) as a programmer -
> Cypress hasn't released the source for their program/debug firmware as far
> as I'm aware.

There are two headers on the pioneer:
- one to program the PSoC5 (and there are some extra gpios)
- one to program external devices from the PSoC5

I thought the two headers were direct SWD access to the PSoC 5 and the PSoC4, respectively. Are you sure about that? How would you prevent the PSoC 4 from responding to the SWD commands?

-Nick

 

I don't see why you can't hook up the loki to the second port, unless
cypress has crippled the firmware into only programming PSoc4s.

[Ada Lim]

On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:42 AM, Nick Johnson <arac...@notdot.net> wrote:

I thought the two headers were direct SWD access to the PSoC 5 and the PSoC4, respectively. Are you sure about that? How would you prevent the PSoC 4 from responding to the SWD commands?

Take off the zero ohm resistors.

 

[Nick Johnson]

I'd prefer a solution that doesn't require people to take a soldering iron to their other dev boards. :)

In any case this is somewhat moot, since I've decided to put Loki on hold for the time being.

-Nick

--