Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2005-01-08 by janehighland
Hi, Why can't the flash utility sync up faster than 38.4 kbps even you can select 57.6 and 115.2 kbps within the utility? I tried it on an LPC2214 as well as an LPC2129, both with 12MHz xtals. Thanks Jane
2005-01-08 by Robert Adsett
At 06:11 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote:
>Why can't the flash utility sync up faster than 38.4 kbps even you can
>select 57.6 and 115.2 kbps within the utility?
What are you using for the level conversion interface?
Robert
" 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions,
be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to
chew a radio signal. "
Kelvin Throop, III2005-01-08 by janehighland
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote: > At 06:11 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote: > >Why can't the flash utility sync up faster than 38.4 kbps even you can > >select 57.6 and 115.2 kbps within the utility? > > What are you using for the level conversion interface? > > Robert > > " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions, > be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to > chew a radio signal. " > > Kelvin Throop, III Hi Kelvin We're using a standard MAXIM RS232 chip. The interface is a known working 115.2 kbps capable interface. I was wondering whether it is bootloader firmware version dependant? I take it you have had no problems running at 115.k? It's strange that 9600 and 38400 work fine. Jane
2005-01-08 by Robert Adsett
At 06:25 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi Kelvin
It's Robert actually, Kelvin is fictional ;)
>We're using a standard MAXIM RS232 chip. The interface is a known
>working 115.2 kbps capable interface. I was wondering whether it is
>bootloader firmware version dependant? I take it you have had no
>problems running at 115.k? It's strange that 9600 and 38400 work fine.
After I sent it another neuron went off and I checked the User manual. The
possible baud rates depend on the crystal frequency. For the 2106 User
manual it's in table 145 on page 185. I expect the MAX is fine but some
level translators have fairly low bandwidths (I've seen specs as low as
9600 bd but I don't remember the part that was for). Reviewing the User
manual I expect you've just hit the limit but you might also want to review
the data sheet for the MAXIM part.
Myself, I've not felt the need to try programming above 38400.
Robert
" 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions,
be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to
chew a radio signal. "
Kelvin Throop, III2005-01-08 by janehighland
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote: > At 06:25 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote: > >Hi Kelvin > > It's Robert actually, Kelvin is fictional ;) > > > >We're using a standard MAXIM RS232 chip. The interface is a known > >working 115.2 kbps capable interface. I was wondering whether it is > >bootloader firmware version dependant? I take it you have had no > >problems running at 115.k? It's strange that 9600 and 38400 work fine. > > After I sent it another neuron went off and I checked the User manual. The > possible baud rates depend on the crystal frequency. For the 2106 User > manual it's in table 145 on page 185. I expect the MAX is fine but some > level translators have fairly low bandwidths (I've seen specs as low as > 9600 bd but I don't remember the part that was for). Reviewing the User > manual I expect you've just hit the limit but you might also want to review > the data sheet for the MAXIM part. > > Myself, I've not felt the need to try programming above 38400. > > Robert > > > " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions, > be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to > chew a radio signal. " > > Kelvin Throop, III Thanks Robert I'll have read of the RS232 data sheets and the 2106 user manual. On the subject of feeling the need to try to program above 38400...we've got >200K of Thumb code and thousands of chips to ISP in the future...I know it will make a difference to our to our PCB subcontractor. Cheers Jane
2005-01-08 by Robert Adsett
At 06:48 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote:
>On the subject of feeling the need to try to program above
>38400...we've got >200K of Thumb code and thousands of chips to ISP in
>the future...I know it will make a difference to our to our PCB
>subcontractor.
Yep for high volume it will make a big difference. It might be worth your
while to bootstrap to a higher baud rate. It's something I've been meaning
to work on when I get some time. The idea is the initial ISP would
download a a small download program to RAM and run it. It would then set
the serial port to a higher baud rate and use a binary download
protocol. The higher might get you a factor of 3 (if you can match rates
closely enough), the reduced overhead of the binary protocol would get you
a factor of 2. All this minus the actual programming overhead and the time
to download the initial stub.
Another option in volume might be to get the parts preprogrammed (assuming
they run identical programs). That gets it out of your subcontractors way
entirely.
For a lot of the stuff I've done functional testing made the programming
time disappear into the noise.
Robert
" 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions,
be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to
chew a radio signal. "
Kelvin Throop, III2005-01-08 by janehighland
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote: > At 06:48 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote: > >On the subject of feeling the need to try to program above > >38400...we've got >200K of Thumb code and thousands of chips to ISP in > >the future...I know it will make a difference to our to our PCB > >subcontractor. > > Yep for high volume it will make a big difference. It might be worth your > while to bootstrap to a higher baud rate. It's something I've been meaning > to work on when I get some time. The idea is the initial ISP would > download a a small download program to RAM and run it. It would then set > the serial port to a higher baud rate and use a binary download > protocol. The higher might get you a factor of 3 (if you can match rates > closely enough), the reduced overhead of the binary protocol would get you > a factor of 2. All this minus the actual programming overhead and the time > to download the initial stub. > > Another option in volume might be to get the parts preprogrammed (assuming > they run identical programs). That gets it out of your subcontractors way > entirely. > > For a lot of the stuff I've done functional testing made the programming > time disappear into the noise. > > Robert > > " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions, > be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to > chew a radio signal. " > > Kelvin Throop, III Thanks Robert. I'll take a look next week on the actual data quality being received transmitted at the CPU. I agree with you, from the table in the user manual for the LPC2106 you can run at 115200 at 12.288 MHz, so at 12MHz even though we'll probably have a small percentage error per bit, we should still be OK. Jane
2005-01-08 by Robert Adsett
At 07:15 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote:
>I'll take a look next week on the actual data quality being received
>transmitted at the CPU. I agree with you, from the table in the user
>manual for the LPC2106 you can run at 115200 at 12.288 MHz, so at
>12MHz even though we'll probably have a small percentage error per
>bit, we should still be OK.
I think one of us is reading the wrong line. I see 12.288 MHz topping out
at 38400.
What is missing is a description of what is limiting the match so that it
could be determined for the actual crystal used. I expect it's a divisor
issue.
If we knew what it was it should be straightforward to figure out which
baudrates will match (and maybe even switch crystals to meet multiple neeeds).
Robert
" 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions,
be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to
chew a radio signal. "
Kelvin Throop, III2005-01-09 by lpcarmed
I had issues with 115K until I replaced the Xtal with a 14.7456MHz one. Also, the lpc21isp.c from Martin Maurer is much more reliable. Big plus using it you can customize, even to the extent of automatically updating the bootlodaer if you wish. --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote: > At 07:15 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote: > >I'll take a look next week on the actual data quality being received > >transmitted at the CPU. I agree with you, from the table in the user > >manual for the LPC2106 you can run at 115200 at 12.288 MHz, so at > >12MHz even though we'll probably have a small percentage error per > >bit, we should still be OK. > > I think one of us is reading the wrong line. I see 12.288 MHz topping out > at 38400. > > What is missing is a description of what is limiting the match so that it > could be determined for the actual crystal used. I expect it's a divisor > issue. > > If we knew what it was it should be straightforward to figure out which > baudrates will match (and maybe even switch crystals to meet multiple neeeds).
> > Robert > > > " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions, > be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to > chew a radio signal. " > > Kelvin Throop, III
2005-01-09 by janehighland
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote: > At 07:15 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote: > >I'll take a look next week on the actual data quality being received > >transmitted at the CPU. I agree with you, from the table in the user > >manual for the LPC2106 you can run at 115200 at 12.288 MHz, so at > >12MHz even though we'll probably have a small percentage error per > >bit, we should still be OK. > > I think one of us is reading the wrong line. I see 12.288 MHz topping out > at 38400. > > What is missing is a description of what is limiting the match so that it > could be determined for the actual crystal used. I expect it's a divisor > issue. > I've had the UARTs on the LPC21xx LPC22xx running fine at 115.2k (e.g. receiving large files with 32 bit CRCs). It just that the divisor arrangement means the baud rate @ 12MHz is approx 1% out (with the PLL multiplying the XTAL by 5 to 60MHz / VPBDIV = 1). I just wondered whether the bootloader on the chip gives up if it can't get an exact baud rate... Jane > If we knew what it was it should be straightforward to figure out which > baudrates will match (and maybe even switch crystals to meet multiple neeeds).
> > Robert > > > " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions, > be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to > chew a radio signal. " > > Kelvin Throop, III
2005-01-09 by janehighland
--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "lpcarmed" <lpcarmed@g...> wrote: > > I had issues with 115K until I replaced the Xtal with a 14.7456MHz > one. Also, the lpc21isp.c from Martin Maurer is much more reliable. > Big plus using it you can customize, even to the extent of > automatically updating the bootlodaer if you wish. Hi - can you email me a copy...I'd like to take a look. Thanks Jane. > > --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Robert Adsett <subscriptions@a...> wrote: > > At 07:15 PM 1/8/05 +0000, you wrote: > > >I'll take a look next week on the actual data quality being received > > >transmitted at the CPU. I agree with you, from the table in the user > > >manual for the LPC2106 you can run at 115200 at 12.288 MHz, so at > > >12MHz even though we'll probably have a small percentage error per > > >bit, we should still be OK. > > > > I think one of us is reading the wrong line. I see 12.288 MHz > topping out > > at 38400. > > > > What is missing is a description of what is limiting the match so > that it > > could be determined for the actual crystal used. I expect it's a > divisor > > issue. > > > > If we knew what it was it should be straightforward to figure out which
> > baudrates will match (and maybe even switch crystals to meet > multiple neeeds). > > > > Robert > > > > > > " 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions, > > be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to > > chew a radio signal. " > > > > Kelvin Throop, III
2005-01-09 by Alex Holden
janehighland wrote: > --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "lpcarmed" <lpcarmed@g...> wrote: >>one. Also, the lpc21isp.c from Martin Maurer is much more reliable. > Hi - can you email me a copy...I'd like to take a look. http://www.google.com/search?q=lpc21isp.c&btnI -- ------------ Alex Holden - http://www.alexholden.net/ ------------ If it doesn't work, you're not hitting it with a big enough hammer
2005-01-09 by jane highland
Thanks - I'll give it a go. Best Regards Jan --- Alex Holden <alex@...> wrote: --------------------------------- janehighland wrote: > --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "lpcarmed" <lpcarmed@g...> wrote: >>one. Also, the lpc21isp.c from Martin Maurer is much more reliable. > Hi - can you email me a copy...I'd like to take a look. http://www.google.com/search?q=lpc21isp.c&btnI -- ------------ Alex Holden - http://www.alexholden.net/ ------------ If it doesn't work, you're not hitting it with a big enough hammer --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. ___________________________________________________________ ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
2005-01-09 by Robert Adsett
At 08:46 AM 1/9/05 +0000, you wrote:
>I've had the UARTs on the LPC21xx LPC22xx running fine at 115.2k (e.g.
>receiving large files with 32 bit CRCs). It just that the divisor
>arrangement means the baud rate @ 12MHz is approx 1% out (with the PLL
>multiplying the XTAL by 5 to 60MHz / VPBDIV = 1). I just wondered
>whether the bootloader on the chip gives up if it can't get an exact
>baud rate...
Remember the ISP program on chip doesn't use the PLL (at least there is no
indication that it does) so a 1% mismatch at the (pll'd) 60MHz could be a
5% mismatch at 12MHz native clock. You can see the problem.
Robert
" 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are always restrictions,
be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't believe me, try to
chew a radio signal. "
Kelvin Throop, III2005-01-09 by jane highland
--- Robert Adsett
<subscriptions@...> wrote:
---------------------------------
At 08:46 AM 1/9/05 +0000, you wrote:
>I've had the UARTs on the LPC21xx LPC22xx running
fine at 115.2k (e.g.
>receiving large files with 32 bit CRCs). It just that
the divisor
>arrangement means the baud rate @ 12MHz is approx 1%
out (with the PLL
>multiplying the XTAL by 5 to 60MHz / VPBDIV = 1). I
just wondered
>whether the bootloader on the chip gives up if it
can't get an exact
>baud rate...
Remember the ISP program on chip doesn't use the PLL
(at least there is no
indication that it does) so a 1% mismatch at the
(pll'd) 60MHz could be a
5% mismatch at 12MHz native clock. You can see the
problem.
Yes I see the problem. I'll have a chat with Philips.
Jane
Robert
" 'Freedom' has no meaning of itself. There are
always restrictions,
be they legal, genetic, or physical. If you don't
believe me, try to
chew a radio signal. "
Kelvin Throop, III
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
___________________________________________________________
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com