You're right, it's confusing. My reference is the Technical Data sheet
of
the 56F805 rev 10. At page 7, it's clearly indicate that TXD0 (pin 107)
is
for SCI0 on port E and TXD1 (pin 52) is for SCI1 on port D. Except for the
pin number, it's the same relation for the 56F807.
My first impression is that the figure 7-2 is incorrect. Maybe someone form
Motorola can give some info on this!
Regards
Bruno
-----Message d'origine-----
De : [mailto:]
Envoy: 8 ao, 2003 17:16
: evlotus7
Cc :
Objet : Re: [motoroladsp] Re: SCI1/ GPIOE + 56F805
pin 107 = TXD0 = SCI1
pin 52 = TXD1 = SCI0
Consult Page 7-5 in the User's Manual.
It confused me for a day as well.
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, evlotus7 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are you talking about SCI1 or SCI0? Because pin 107 is for SCI0 and
> you had configure the registers of SCI1 (TX1 pin 52).
>
> Regards,
>
> Bruno
> --- In , mark@b... wrote:
> >
> > Me again.
> >
> > I have tried to get data to come out of the TX0 pin(107) using the
> SCI
> > interface. I believe I have it setup properly but I would love it
> if
> > someone could check my settings just to be sure:
> >
> > #define (WORD*)sci1br 0x0f10
> > #define (WORD*)sci1cr 0x0f11
> > #define (WORD*)sci1sr 0x0f12
> > #define (WORD*)sci1dr 0x0f13
> >
> > *sci1br = 2083; //This is 2400 baud with a clock at 80Mhz -
> hopefully
> > *sci1cr = 0x00CC;
> >
> >
> > now the code I execute to send data is pretty simple, maybe too
> simple?
> >
> > result = *sci1sr;
> > *sci1dr = 0x0c; //First Byte of data. TDRE should be cleared,
> but it
> > //isn't. Page 12-9 #2 at top
> >
> > while pin 15 in the sci1sr reg is 0
> > result=*sci1sr;
> >
> > What else would I need to do to enable SCI1?
>
> _____________________________________
> Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the
author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply
all" if
you want your answer to be distributed to the entire group. >
> _____________________________________
> About this discussion group:
>
> To Join:
>
> To Post:
>
> To Leave:
>
> Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp
>
> More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3
> ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Reply by ●August 8, 20032003-08-08
pin 107 = TXD0 = SCI1
pin 52 = TXD1 = SCI0
Consult Page 7-5 in the User's Manual.
It confused me for a day as well.
On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, evlotus7 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are you talking about SCI1 or SCI0? Because pin 107 is for SCI0 and
> you had configure the registers of SCI1 (TX1 pin 52).
>
> Regards,
>
> Bruno
> --- In , mark@b... wrote:
> >
> > Me again.
> >
> > I have tried to get data to come out of the TX0 pin(107) using the
> SCI
> > interface. I believe I have it setup properly but I would love it
> if
> > someone could check my settings just to be sure:
> >
> > #define (WORD*)sci1br 0x0f10
> > #define (WORD*)sci1cr 0x0f11
> > #define (WORD*)sci1sr 0x0f12
> > #define (WORD*)sci1dr 0x0f13
> >
> > *sci1br = 2083; //This is 2400 baud with a clock at 80Mhz -
> hopefully
> > *sci1cr = 0x00CC;
> >
> >
> > now the code I execute to send data is pretty simple, maybe too
> simple?
> >
> > result = *sci1sr;
> > *sci1dr = 0x0c; //First Byte of data. TDRE should be cleared,
> but it
> > //isn't. Page 12-9 #2 at top
> >
> > while pin 15 in the sci1sr reg is 0
> > result=*sci1sr;
> >
> > What else would I need to do to enable SCI1?
>
> _____________________________________
> Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the
author of this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply
all" if you want
your answer to be distributed to the entire group. >
> _____________________________________
> About this discussion group:
>
> To Join:
>
> To Post:
>
> To Leave:
>
> Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp
>
> More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3
> ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Reply by evlotus7●August 8, 20032003-08-08
Hi,
Are you talking about SCI1 or SCI0? Because pin 107 is for SCI0 and
you had configure the registers of SCI1 (TX1 pin 52).
Regards,
Bruno
--- In , mark@b... wrote: >
> Me again.
>
> I have tried to get data to come out of the TX0 pin(107) using the SCI > interface. I believe I have it setup properly but
I would love it if > someone could check my settings just to be
sure:
>
> #define (WORD*)sci1br 0x0f10
> #define (WORD*)sci1cr 0x0f11
> #define (WORD*)sci1sr 0x0f12
> #define (WORD*)sci1dr 0x0f13
>
> *sci1br = 2083; //This is 2400 baud with a clock at 80Mhz - hopefully > *sci1cr = 0x00CC;
> now the code I execute to send data is pretty simple, maybe too simple? >
> result = *sci1sr;
> *sci1dr = 0x0c; //First Byte of data. TDRE should be cleared, but it > //isn't. Page 12-9 #2 at top
>
> while pin 15 in the sci1sr reg is 0
> result=*sci1sr;
>
> What else would I need to do to enable SCI1?
Reply by Gilstrap, Monte●August 8, 20032003-08-08
You may need to initialize the
GPIO:
*(WORD*)(0x0fe3) |= 0x00c0;
-----Original Message----- From: m...@bish.net
[mailto:m...@bish.net] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 12:27 PM To: m...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [motoroladsp] SCI1/ GPIOE
+ 56F805
Me again.
I have tried to
get data to come out of the TX0 pin(107) using the SCI interface. I
believe I have it setup properly but I would love it if someone could check
my settings just to be sure:
*sci1br =
2083; //This is 2400 baud with a clock at 80Mhz -
hopefully *sci1cr = 0x00CC;now the code I execute to send data is pretty
simple, maybe too simple?
result = *sci1sr; *sci1dr =
0x0c; //First Byte of data. TDRE should be
cleared, but it
//isn't. Page 12-9 #2 at top
while pin 15 in the sci1sr reg is 0
result=*sci1sr;
What else would I need to do to enable SCI1?
_____________________________________ Note: If you do a simple
"reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will receive
your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer to be
distributed to the entire group.
_____________________________________ About this discussion group:
I have tried to get data to come out of the TX0 pin(107) using the SCI
interface. I believe I have it setup properly but I would love it if
someone could check my settings just to be sure:
*sci1br = 2083; //This is 2400 baud with a clock at 80Mhz - hopefully
*sci1cr = 0x00CC;
now the code I execute to send data is pretty simple, maybe too simple?
result = *sci1sr;
*sci1dr = 0x0c; //First Byte of data. TDRE should be cleared, but it
//isn't. Page 12-9 #2 at top
while pin 15 in the sci1sr reg is 0
result=*sci1sr;
What else would I need to do to enable SCI1?
Reply by Hutchings William-p23437●August 8, 20032003-08-08
Terry
-
I
don't think that you will run into any issues with the upgrade. Their
are not significant changes between SDK 2.5 and 3.0 just additions of new
stationaries to support two new 56F800 devices and some additional telephony
algorithims and drivers. The only change was all SDK projects (*.mcp) were
converted to use CodeWarrior 5.1. Thanks.
-
Bill
-----Original
Message----- From: Litinas, Terry [mailto:t...@itwbe.com] Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 4:31 AM To:
'isierra95' Cc: m...@yahoogroups.com Subject:
RE: [motoroladsp] Re: CodeWarrior for DSP 5.1 Upgrade
Irene,
Thanks for the input. I'm a little
nervous about the differences between SDK 2.5 and 3.0 since I have created
some drivers for my hardware patterned after the SDK 2.5 and wonder if they
will still work OK with CodeWarrior 5.1. Sounds like to me that
there's only one way to find out. I will try to make some time next
week to give it a try.
Thanks again, Terry
-----Original Message----- From: isierra95 [mailto:i...@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 5:33 PM To: m...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [motoroladsp] Re: CodeWarrior for DSP 5.1 UpgradeTerry, The best way to convert your SDK projects
from one version to the next is to create a new project using the new
stationary and drag your sources in there. So if you have a project
that was created with SDK v2.5 then when you get the 3.0SDK you would
create a new stationary using the same processor as you were using
before and drag your sources files from your previous project in.
When you get the new SDK 3.0 make sure that you get the right one. There
is a strip down version that only works with the DSP56800Demo board and
there is one that is a full version that will with all processor.
Using SDK 2.5 with CodeWarrior for DSP v5.1 is not advised.
Regards, Irene --- In m...@yahoogroups.com, "Litinas, Terry"
<tlitinas@i...> wrote: > Hi, > > I am
currently using CodeWarrior for DSP 5.05 with SDK 2.5 for 56F807 >
development. I would like to upgrade to 5.1 and wonder what pitfalls
there > might be. Are there any changes required to my current 5.05 projects or > code? Is SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior 5.1 or is
it mandatory to > upgrade that to 3.0 also? If anybody has gone
through this I would much > appreciate your experiences. > > Thanks, > > Terry Litinas > Project
Engineer > ITW Balance Engineering > 1731 Thorncroft >
Troy, Mi. 48084 > tlitinas@i... > Ph: (248)643-2876 >
Fx: (248)643-2888 _____________________________________ Note: If you
do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message
will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want
your answer to be distributed to the entire group.
_____________________________________ About this discussion group:
_____________________________________ Note: If you
do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the author of this message will
receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if you want your answer
to be distributed to the entire group.
_____________________________________ About this discussion group:
Thanks for the input. I'm a little nervous about the differences between
SDK
2.5 and 3.0 since I have created some drivers for my hardware patterned
after the SDK 2.5 and wonder if they will still work OK with CodeWarrior
5.1. Sounds like to me that there's only one way to find out. I will try
to
make some time next week to give it a try.
Thanks again,
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: isierra95 [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 5:33 PM
To:
Subject: [motoroladsp] Re: CodeWarrior for DSP 5.1 Upgrade
Terry,
The best way to convert your SDK projects from one version to
the next is to create a new project using the new stationary and
drag your sources in there. So if you have a project that was
created with SDK v2.5 then when you get the 3.0SDK you would create
a new stationary using the same processor as you were using before
and drag your sources files from your previous project in.
When you get the new SDK 3.0 make sure that you get the right one.
There is a strip down version that only works with the DSP56800Demo
board and there is one that is a full version that will with all
processor.
Using SDK 2.5 with CodeWarrior for DSP v5.1 is not advised.
Regards,
Irene
--- In , "Litinas, Terry" <tlitinas@i...>
wrote: > Hi,
>
> I am currently using CodeWarrior for DSP 5.05 with SDK 2.5 for 56F807 > development. I would like to upgrade to 5.1 and
wonder what pitfalls there > might be. Are there any changes required to my
current 5.05 projects or > code? Is SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior 5.1
or is it mandatory to > upgrade that to 3.0 also? If anybody has gone
through this I would much > appreciate your experiences.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Terry Litinas
> Project Engineer
> ITW Balance Engineering
> 1731 Thorncroft
> Troy, Mi. 48084
> tlitinas@i...
> Ph: (248)643-2876
> Fx: (248)643-2888
_____________________________________
Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the
author of
this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if
you
want your answer to be distributed to the entire group.
_____________________________________
About this discussion group:
Terry,
The best way to convert your SDK projects from one version to
the next is to create a new project using the new stationary and
drag your sources in there. So if you have a project that was
created with SDK v2.5 then when you get the 3.0SDK you would create
a new stationary using the same processor as you were using before
and drag your sources files from your previous project in.
When you get the new SDK 3.0 make sure that you get the right one.
There is a strip down version that only works with the DSP56800Demo
board and there is one that is a full version that will with all
processor.
Using SDK 2.5 with CodeWarrior for DSP v5.1 is not advised.
Regards,
Irene
--- In , "Litinas, Terry" <tlitinas@i...>
wrote: > Hi,
>
> I am currently using CodeWarrior for DSP 5.05 with SDK 2.5 for 56F807 > development. I would like to upgrade to 5.1 and
wonder what pitfalls there > might be. Are there any changes required to my
current 5.05 projects or > code? Is SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior 5.1
or is it mandatory to > upgrade that to 3.0 also? If anybody has gone
through this I would much > appreciate your experiences.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Terry Litinas
> Project Engineer
> ITW Balance Engineering
> 1731 Thorncroft
> Troy, Mi. 48084
> tlitinas@i...
> Ph: (248)643-2876
> Fx: (248)643-2888
Reply by Litinas, Terry●August 7, 20032003-08-07
Hong,
I had forgotten that the "bool" data type I use so often is actually
just a
typedef for an int.
Thanks again,
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: hong_dspnews [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 1:54 PM
To:
Subject: [motoroladsp] Re: CodeWarrior for DSP 5.1 Upgrade
Terry,
You are right. CodeWarrior for DSP56800 doesn't support bool data
type, neither v5.0 nor 5.1. In reality these options are only
supported in C++ and since CodeWarrior for DSP doesn't support C++ so
these options have no affect. It is a bug that these options were
checked as default in v5.0, and this bug is fixed in v5.1.
Hope it helps.
Hong
--- In , "Litinas, Terry" <tlitinas@i...>
wrote: > Hong,
>
> Thank you for the information. Does this mean that 5.1 doesn't support the > bool data type?
>
> Terry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hong_dspnews [mailto:hong_dspnews@y...]
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 10:55 AM
> To:
> Subject: [motoroladsp] Re: CodeWarrior for DSP 5.1 Upgrade
> Hi Terry,
> The CodeWarrior for DSP56800 v5.1 Provides new IDE, new Compiler and
> improved debugger.
> In the "New CodeWarrior IDE"
> Docking windows now supported
> Code completion now supported in editor
> Improved configurable register view
> Improved memory view
> Improved resizable register view
> Workspaces now supported
>
> "New 56800 Compiler."
> -Optimized to give better performance that version 5.0.4
> -Improved verification and validation methodology gives most
> reliable code
> "Improved debugger"
> - Ability to debug any 56800 on a generic JTAG scan chain
>
> I have positive experience myself after I upgrade CodeWarrior for
> DSP56800 from v5.0 to v5.1. You can port your CodeWarrior v5.0.5
> project to v5.1 directly. You may get some warning messages like:
> "Warning: unsupported option:Enable bool support"
> "Warning: unsupported option:Ebnable wchar_t Support"
>
> Just uncheck two options "Enable bool Support" and "Enable
wchar_t
> Support" in the Target Settings Panels> Language Settings >
C/C++
> Language. You should solve these problem.
>
> SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior v5.1, but I still recommend you
> to upgrade SDK to 3.0. You can find SDK 3.0 at the following web
> site, it's free:
> http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?
> code=MSW3SDK000AA&nodeIdM0ylgz6wYM959617836292
> Hope it helps.
> Regards
> Hong
>
> --- In , "Litinas, Terry" <tlitinas@i...>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am currently using CodeWarrior for DSP 5.05 with SDK 2.5 for
> 56F807
> > development. I would like to upgrade to 5.1 and wonder what
> pitfalls there
> > might be. Are there any changes required to my current 5.05
> projects or
> > code? Is SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior 5.1 or is it mandatory > to
> > upgrade that to 3.0 also? If anybody has gone through this I would
> much
> > appreciate your experiences.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Terry Litinas
> > Project Engineer
> > ITW Balance Engineering
> > 1731 Thorncroft
> > Troy, Mi. 48084
> > tlitinas@i...
> > Ph: (248)643-2876
> > Fx: (248)643-2888
>
> _____________________________________
> Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only
the author of > this message will receive your answer. You need to
do a "reply all" if you > want your answer to be distributed to the entire
group.
>
> _____________________________________
> About this discussion group:
>
> To Join:
>
> To Post:
>
> To Leave:
>
> Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp
>
> More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3
> ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
_____________________________________
Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only the
author of
this message will receive your answer. You need to do a "reply all" if
you
want your answer to be distributed to the entire group.
_____________________________________
About this discussion group:
Terry,
You are right. CodeWarrior for DSP56800 doesn't support bool data
type, neither v5.0 nor 5.1. In reality these options are only
supported in C++ and since CodeWarrior for DSP doesn't support C++ so
these options have no affect. It is a bug that these options were
checked as default in v5.0, and this bug is fixed in v5.1.
Hope it helps.
Hong
--- In , "Litinas, Terry" <tlitinas@i...>
wrote: > Hong,
>
> Thank you for the information. Does this mean that 5.1 doesn't support the > bool data type?
>
> Terry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hong_dspnews [mailto:hong_dspnews@y...]
> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 10:55 AM
> To:
> Subject: [motoroladsp] Re: CodeWarrior for DSP 5.1 Upgrade
> Hi Terry,
> The CodeWarrior for DSP56800 v5.1 Provides new IDE, new Compiler and
> improved debugger.
> In the "New CodeWarrior IDE"
> Docking windows now supported
> Code completion now supported in editor
> Improved configurable register view
> Improved memory view
> Improved resizable register view
> Workspaces now supported
>
> "New 56800 Compiler."
> -Optimized to give better performance that version 5.0.4
> -Improved verification and validation methodology gives most
> reliable code
> "Improved debugger"
> - Ability to debug any 56800 on a generic JTAG scan chain
>
> I have positive experience myself after I upgrade CodeWarrior for
> DSP56800 from v5.0 to v5.1. You can port your CodeWarrior v5.0.5
> project to v5.1 directly. You may get some warning messages like:
> "Warning: unsupported option:Enable bool support"
> "Warning: unsupported option:Ebnable wchar_t Support"
>
> Just uncheck two options "Enable bool Support" and "Enable
wchar_t
> Support" in the Target Settings Panels> Language Settings >
C/C++
> Language. You should solve these problem.
>
> SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior v5.1, but I still recommend you
> to upgrade SDK to 3.0. You can find SDK 3.0 at the following web
> site, it's free:
> http://e-www.motorola.com/webapp/sps/site/prod_summary.jsp?
> code=MSW3SDK000AA&nodeIdM0ylgz6wYM959617836292
> Hope it helps.
> Regards
> Hong
>
> --- In , "Litinas, Terry" <tlitinas@i...>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am currently using CodeWarrior for DSP 5.05 with SDK 2.5 for
> 56F807
> > development. I would like to upgrade to 5.1 and wonder what
> pitfalls there
> > might be. Are there any changes required to my current 5.05
> projects or
> > code? Is SDK 2.5 compatible with CodeWarrior 5.1 or is it mandatory > to
> > upgrade that to 3.0 also? If anybody has gone through this I would
> much
> > appreciate your experiences.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Terry Litinas
> > Project Engineer
> > ITW Balance Engineering
> > 1731 Thorncroft
> > Troy, Mi. 48084
> > tlitinas@i...
> > Ph: (248)643-2876
> > Fx: (248)643-2888
>
> _____________________________________
> Note: If you do a simple "reply" with your email client, only
the author of > this message will receive your answer. You need to
do a "reply all" if you > want your answer to be distributed to the entire
group.
>
> _____________________________________
> About this discussion group:
>
> To Join:
>
> To Post:
>
> To Leave:
>
> Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp
>
> More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3
> ">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/