· Do you plan some kind of watchdog into Prop2? Like a 32bit·counter, which may be reset with a HUB OP?
· Currently I am using CTRB with external loopback to the·Reset pin. The problem is, that only one COG may reset the watchdog. This keeps things complicated and one pin and one COG has to be reserved for watchdog operation...
IN/OUT on B could be used to implement special functions: for example, bit-reversing for FFT. The control register could determine the function of the port. These features could be expanded without changes in the processors behavior.
Would it be possible to create a new thread with the final (or current final) specs and details of the next prop. Its very exciting but this thread is about 9 gezillain pages long now and I am completely lost. Perhaps you could just lock the new thread so it serves only as a reference.
Greets one and All...
WOW... thats all I can say is WOW... Be gone for a while... and when ya come back ... BAM... the whole thing is changed...
LOL... Ok... just my humble .02's worth...
Faster speed, more hub ram... now the rest gets interesting...
There are indeed two sides to this whole camp... more cogs = more multi-tasking at the same time...
BUT... reduced HUB (shared access)...
I'm all for speed. But, as so many have already pointed out, that speed is going to be idle if you cant move the data between cogs or the hub.
I know, it's 100% up to the task at hand your coding for, but ram is ram, and speed doesnt mean nothing if you havent the ram to feed your app.
Data starvation kills so many things...
yes, COG ram (and I know there's reasons why it's the size it is) is needed......
More cogs? <shakes head> Naaa; Good coding and shared resources within a single cog can reduce the number cogs needed...
IE: KeyBrd & Mouse in 1 COG, not like the original 2 cogs..
8 Cogs is great... Adding COG ram will make them even better...
Hub Ram... 32k is good, 246K would be awesome...
Adding some of the nifty things many whom are greater then I point out, and I think the P2 will be unstopable...
<steps off subject for a few sentences>
WOW, it's great to see someone actuall rememberd me.. LOL..
I've tons of reading to catch up on... and projects to share... anyway, it's good to be back... later
<gets back on subject>
I still have a lot of reading in this one thread, I just wanted to post an intermittent point..
later All!
KK
<yes, the original, unstopable, unsinkable and unkillable KK is back... in the flesh...>
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller + Hardware - extra bits for the bit bucket =· 1 Coffeeless KaosKidd
·
Turns out that 2·prop 2'z can do nearly anything I'd want to do with·32 cogs as long as I add SRAM and SD along with all the resistors and or a D/A
converter. Imagine what the prop 3 would do! [noparse]:o[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔ Realize that I am really a mad scientist··· and
Harley said...
Decided to update the previous listing. (to forum moderator - delete old one if desired)
Again, the editor changed the formatting; may be because 'table' originally was in monospaced (iMac) Monaco font. I have left it as it pasted in...
I mentioned this to a friend and when looking at the page source he discovered it pointed to a code style sheet with one fixed width font (Lucida Console) specified then a stack of proportional fonts as fallbacks!
I think Parallax forum admins could prolly fix this by not having any proportional fallback options at all and adding a few more fixed width ones.
i am new with the propeller. Ok, i build my own Prop board called easyPROP,
but after a lot of playings the last days i can say:
a) speed is perfect
b) a great controller for the 21. century
c) easy to handle for beginners with some programming skills
d) or easy to handle for beginners without programming skills by asking Mike or Graham
e) space of HUB-RAM (NOT COG RAM) is very, very bad
Therefore, i am going to vote for the "P8X256" with 8 cogs and just a little bit more RAM, please.
I think the power of the propeller is in doing graphics and embedded controls together with the
very easy to handle developing-software.
best regards and keep on going
Franz
Post Edited (Franz Achatz) : 8/3/2007 6:51:23 PM GMT
Determininistic HUB access is a great asset of the Prop, you buy it by inefficent bandwidth use. Both seems impossible.
This patent is a laugh! Consider someone getting a patent for drawing square roots! He can't, as it is considered to be "common knowledge". But of course, it is not
Now, I didn't read through all 533 posts before I arrived at this idea, so it may be a repeat.· Since the PII is expected to have 64 I/O pins and 256K of HUB RAM, I wonder how hard it would be to to allow a portion of the I/O to be optionally re-assigned as an address bus at HUB speed?· I·do realize that doing it with·software is also an obvious·option, and would be more in-line with the Propeller concept.
Ken
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
The more I know, the more I know I don't know.· Is this what they call Wisdom?
Would it be possible to create a new thread with the final (or current final) specs and details of the next prop. Its very exciting but this thread is about 9 gezillain pages long now and I am completely lost. Perhaps you could just lock the new thread so it serves only as a reference.
I think that's a good call. Having now read through the entire thread ( ideas, proposals, asides, tangents and all ), I'm still not entire clear what will or will not be implemented in the MkII and what we have to 'wait to see' for when it does get released.
A summary of what it will have and will not have would be very useful.
Would it be possible to create a new thread with the final (or current final) specs and details of the next prop. Its very exciting but this thread is about 9 gezillain pages long now and I am completely lost. Perhaps you could just lock the new thread so it serves only as a reference.
I think that's a good call. Having now read through the entire thread ( ideas, proposals, asides, tangents and all ), I'm still not entire clear what will or will not be implemented in the MkII and what we have to 'wait to see' for when it does get released.
A summary of what it will have and will not have would be very useful.
I really put that together so I myself could understand what Prop gen#2 was going to be.
As the posts grew and grew it got too difficult to recall what I'd read days/weeks before. I probably plowed through the whole list 4, 5 times before deciding my list had to be generated. Then, decided it might help others too. So be it.
Hopefully I'm close to what's really being included. It not, please correct.
Don't know if this has been beaten to death or not, but my votes (in priority order):
1) more RAM in the hub - this is the biggest limiting factor to me, for applications that are in my area of interest
2) more speed - even though the Prop clocks in as the fastest micro of this type on my informal benchmark tests (running an interpreted language),
2-4x more speed would make quite a few more things possible that really aren't quite in the ballpark at this point.
3) more cogs would be nice but I can probably live with 8 for now. Certainly more would be helpful in some situations since I sometimes need 4 or more serial ports.
PLEASE don't do away with the DIP package!! Go to a larger one if you have to (aren't there DIP 60 or 64 pin packages?) - I don't mind paying extra for it if necessary, but I don't want to mess with surface mount.
PLEASE don't do away with the DIP package!! Go to a larger one if you have to (aren't there DIP 60 or 64 pin packages?) - I don't mind paying extra for it if necessary, but I don't want to mess with surface mount.
No there are no DIP packages that will work with the higher pin count the package presently used is the highest pin count for readily availible packaging, and remember the 64 is only the I/O, theres also Vdd(IO), Vdd(core), GND, Xin, Xout and Resn to include and the power requires more than one pin for better chip distribution.
Paul Baker (Parallax) said...
If we were to do that we would create a module, ala spin stamp.
Yes, but since the current Spin Stamp is roughly 5x as expensive as the DIP module, it's not hard to see why we'd consider that an unfortunate scenario for hobbyists. We can provide our own crystal, eeprom, and voltage regulator.
It's been mentioned before, but the Propeller V2 is an 80 pin device on a physically large chip. The largest practical DIP package is 40 pin. I know there have been 64 pin packages made in the past, but no one will make any new ones at a reasonable price. There's also a lot of space used for the lead-frame that can be better spent putting the whole thing on a hybrid module with the "trimmings" like the crystal, EEPROM and voltage regulator(s) that can ease the move to a dual power supply (3.3V and 1.8V).
By the time the V2 chip comes out, it will make even less sense to have a DIP version, particularly for a limited version with only 1/2 the I/O pins available. Modules are the way to go. They can even add some on-board functionality using the I/O pins not brought out to the pins.
will it be only a QFN version?
If yes, then handsoldering is not possible anymore.
Therefore a QFP version would be nice, too.
best regards
Franz
That too has been answered in the gazillion posts that make up this thread. Short answer : YES! A QFP version will be made - as far as I can tell it's only the DIP that's going.
Packages add a lot to the cost of any sliver of silicon and DIP is huge as is PLCC. Have you checked the cost of sockets as well? Not too much to choose from out there. Went to the Farnell site and they only had an 84-pin ZIF PLCC socket for the paltry sum of $97. People used to complain about QFP but now it's not so bad after all, is it? Then there is QFN which is very easy to hand solder if you make some extra allowance in the pcb lands. I've used 80-pin QFP packs since the early 90's and they are dead easy to solder even with a plumber's iron, in fact the bigger tips are easier than needlepoints.
For many other SMD only chips out there that I have had a need to breadboard at times I have always designed a DIP PCB or similar module for the chip, I see no reason why this should be a minus for PropII. Plus the high-speed the chip will be running at will be a big problem with large packages anyway.
Bergamot said...
Yes, but since the current Spin Stamp is roughly 5x as expensive as the DIP module, it's not hard to see why we'd consider that an unfortunate scenario for hobbyists. We can provide our own crystal, eeprom, and voltage regulator.
two cents: as above but with a presensitized end of the pcb. Voila: semi-custom boards. May require "Don't dip this end" for the·etching challenged.
The comment about the $97 socket was simply to illustrate that there is not so much selection these days as there would have been 10-15 years ago, the catalogs would have been full of them, ZIF was all Farnell had. I have 84-pin sockets and chips and they are monsters (height-wise too) compared to the QFP.
When it comes to hand-soldering the QFN I still use solder paste and usually cook the board in a toaster oven but it can be done with a needlepoint and solder paste if the lands extend out a bit for the iron tip to contact and heat the paste. There is also the center substrate pad and these benefit from vias to facilitate soldering from the bottom of the pcb, just feed some solder on and let it run through to the chip and melt the solder-paste.
Comments
· Do you plan some kind of watchdog into Prop2?
· Currently I am using CTRB with external loopback to the·Reset pin. The problem is, that only one COG may reset the watchdog. This keeps things complicated and one pin and one COG has to be reserved for watchdog operation...
Regards,
· Attila
Scott
Would it be possible to create a new thread with the final (or current final) specs and details of the next prop. Its very exciting but this thread is about 9 gezillain pages long now and I am completely lost. Perhaps you could just lock the new thread so it serves only as a reference.
Graham
WOW... thats all I can say is WOW... Be gone for a while... and when ya come back ... BAM... the whole thing is changed...
LOL... Ok... just my humble .02's worth...
Faster speed, more hub ram... now the rest gets interesting...
There are indeed two sides to this whole camp... more cogs = more multi-tasking at the same time...
BUT... reduced HUB (shared access)...
I'm all for speed. But, as so many have already pointed out, that speed is going to be idle if you cant move the data between cogs or the hub.
I know, it's 100% up to the task at hand your coding for, but ram is ram, and speed doesnt mean nothing if you havent the ram to feed your app.
Data starvation kills so many things...
yes, COG ram (and I know there's reasons why it's the size it is) is needed......
More cogs? <shakes head> Naaa; Good coding and shared resources within a single cog can reduce the number cogs needed...
IE: KeyBrd & Mouse in 1 COG, not like the original 2 cogs..
8 Cogs is great... Adding COG ram will make them even better...
Hub Ram... 32k is good, 246K would be awesome...
Adding some of the nifty things many whom are greater then I point out, and I think the P2 will be unstopable...
<steps off subject for a few sentences>
WOW, it's great to see someone actuall rememberd me.. LOL..
I've tons of reading to catch up on... and projects to share... anyway, it's good to be back... later
<gets back on subject>
I still have a lot of reading in this one thread, I just wanted to post an intermittent point..
later All!
KK
<yes, the original, unstopable, unsinkable and unkillable KK is back... in the flesh...>
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller + Hardware - extra bits for the bit bucket =· 1 Coffeeless KaosKidd
·
converter. Imagine what the prop 3 would do! [noparse]:o[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Realize that I am really a mad scientist··· and
Don't forget it!
http://raydillon.com/Images/Illustration/GameArt/WildIsle/WildIsle-Ink-ScientistClose.jpg
·
I mentioned this to a friend and when looking at the page source he discovered it pointed to a code style sheet with one fixed width font (Lucida Console) specified then a stack of proportional fonts as fallbacks!
I think Parallax forum admins could prolly fix this by not having any proportional fallback options at all and adding a few more fixed width ones.
i am new with the propeller. Ok, i build my own Prop board called easyPROP,
but after a lot of playings the last days i can say:
a) speed is perfect
b) a great controller for the 21. century
c) easy to handle for beginners with some programming skills
d) or easy to handle for beginners without programming skills by asking Mike or Graham
e) space of HUB-RAM (NOT COG RAM) is very, very bad
Therefore, i am going to vote for the "P8X256" with 8 cogs and just a little bit more RAM, please.
I think the power of the propeller is in doing graphics and embedded controls together with the
very easy to handle developing-software.
best regards and keep on going
Franz
Post Edited (Franz Achatz) : 8/3/2007 6:51:23 PM GMT
This patent is a laugh! Consider someone getting a patent for drawing square roots! He can't, as it is considered to be "common knowledge". But of course, it is not
Ken
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
The more I know, the more I know I don't know.· Is this what they call Wisdom?
I think that's a good call. Having now read through the entire thread ( ideas, proposals, asides, tangents and all ), I'm still not entire clear what will or will not be implemented in the MkII and what we have to 'wait to see' for when it does get released.
A summary of what it will have and will not have would be very useful.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Paul Baker
Propeller Applications Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
I really put that together so I myself could understand what Prop gen#2 was going to be.
As the posts grew and grew it got too difficult to recall what I'd read days/weeks before. I probably plowed through the whole list 4, 5 times before deciding my list had to be generated. Then, decided it might help others too. So be it.
Hopefully I'm close to what's really being included. It not, please correct.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Harley Shanko
1) more RAM in the hub - this is the biggest limiting factor to me, for applications that are in my area of interest
2) more speed - even though the Prop clocks in as the fastest micro of this type on my informal benchmark tests (running an interpreted language),
2-4x more speed would make quite a few more things possible that really aren't quite in the ballpark at this point.
3) more cogs would be nice but I can probably live with 8 for now. Certainly more would be helpful in some situations since I sometimes need 4 or more serial ports.
PLEASE don't do away with the DIP package!! Go to a larger one if you have to (aren't there DIP 60 or 64 pin packages?) - I don't mind paying extra for it if necessary, but I don't want to mess with surface mount.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Paul Baker
Propeller Applications Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
Post Edited (Paul Baker (Parallax)) : 8/27/2007 10:44:07 PM GMT
Also, any chance of going OTP instead of masked for the bulk of the ROM?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Paul Baker
Propeller Applications Engineer
Parallax, Inc.
By the time the V2 chip comes out, it will make even less sense to have a DIP version, particularly for a limited version with only 1/2 the I/O pins available. Modules are the way to go. They can even add some on-board functionality using the I/O pins not brought out to the pins.
will it be only a QFN version?
If yes, then handsoldering is not possible anymore.
Therefore a QFP version would be nice, too.
best regards
Franz
·
For many other SMD only chips out there that I have had a need to breadboard at times I have always designed a DIP PCB or similar module for the chip, I see no reason why this should be a minus for PropII. Plus the high-speed the chip will be running at will be a big problem with large packages anyway.
*Peter*
is this really save just soldering at the outside of this QFN Pads ????
Franz
$1.34
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
The more I know, the more I know I don't know.· Is this what they call Wisdom?
When it comes to hand-soldering the QFN I still use solder paste and usually cook the board in a toaster oven but it can be done with a needlepoint and solder paste if the lands extend out a bit for the iron tip to contact and heat the paste. There is also the center substrate pad and these benefit from vias to facilitate soldering from the bottom of the pcb, just feed some solder on and let it run through to the chip and melt the solder-paste.
my2cents
*Peter*