Forums

Processor Expert, your opinion, is it any good?

Started by t_karin1 May 17, 2004
I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-ii
RTOS.

I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as much
internal flash.
I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.

I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for me.
I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
file and every line in my embedded system.
I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
Processor Expert
Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes it
harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
system?
Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
let me know what you think
Thanks
Tomer




If you are interested to make 1 or 2 leds blink, PE is the right
software for you. Even in this case, you will have some problems.
Just visit the PE's site and you will notice that there is a patch
every 10days. I spent more than 4 months to make a serious project
with this software but I had( and have) very serious problems.
I still use SDK for applications that need to work without problems.
All the applications I built with SDK, I built with PE as well and
all PE
projects are useless. Unfortunately Motorola doesn't support anymore
SDK and you cannot use it for new designs. PE is very good as idea,
but most probably will be good to use next year. In the meantime I
already ordered a development kit from TI and I am going to use TI's
DSPs in my new projects. I really spent a lot of time (and money) to
this "good for blinking leds" software.

A disapointed former user of DSP 56F807
Pantelis --- In , "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
> Tomer



I tend to agree that the Metrowerks-created tools are difficult to use.

flybot52 <f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If you are interested to make 1 or 2 leds  blink, PE is the right
software for you. Even in this case, you will have some problems.
Just visit the PE's site and you will notice that there is a patch
every 10days.  I spent more than 4 months to make a serious project
with this software but I had( and have) very serious problems.
I still use SDK for applications that need to work without problems.
All the applications I built with SDK, I built with PE as well and
all PE
projects are useless. Unfortunately Motorola doesn't support anymore
SDK and you cannot use it for new designs. PE is very good as idea,
but most probably will be good to use next year. In the meantime I
already ordered a development kit from TI and I am going to use TI's
DSPs in my new projects. I really spent a lot of time (and money) to
this "good for blinking leds" software.

A disapointed former user of DSP 56F807
Pantelis--- In m...@yahoogroups.com, "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
>  Tomer


_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3



What really annoys me is that Motorola seem to be pushing you down this PE
route whether you want it or not. Personally, I hate this whole automatic
code generation thing. It's very difficult to see what's going on and it's
too easy to try and write code without really understanding the processor.

Maybe it's good for learners or people who are doing simple applications, but
when you want to squeeze all the performance you can out of a system or maybe
do something out of the ordinary, I'm sure it's not a good system. I'd like
to see standard header files being supplied with 6.x so that people can write
code easily in the traditional fashion. If Motorola are worried about people
getting peripherals up and running easily, example code would be a perfectly
good way of doing it.

I'm very suspicious about how bloaty the target software might end up being as
well. --- In , "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
> Tomer


_____________________________________
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

Yahoo! Groups Links



I never even liked the SDK.  I thought it added too much overhead, and made the code bulkier and more difficult to understand. I started out trying to use the SDK, but gave up and created my own header files.  I wrote the lowest level subroutines (the ones that twiddle bits) in assembly language. It's not that hard.
 
Doug Holub
Irving, TX
----- Original Message -----
From: Kenneth Ciszewski
To: flybot52 ; m...@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Re: Processor Expert, your opinion, is it any good?

I tend to agree that the Metrowerks-created tools are difficult to use.

flybot52 <f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If you are interested to make 1 or 2 leds  blink, PE is the right
software for you. Even in this case, you will have some problems.
Just visit the PE's site and you will notice that there is a patch
every 10days.  I spent more than 4 months to make a serious project
with this software but I had( and have) very serious problems.
I still use SDK for applications that need to work without problems.
All the applications I built with SDK, I built with PE as well and
all PE
projects are useless. Unfortunately Motorola doesn't support anymore
SDK and you cannot use it for new designs. PE is very good as idea,
but most probably will be good to use next year. In the meantime I
already ordered a development kit from TI and I am going to use TI's
DSPs in my new projects. I really spent a lot of time (and money) to
this "good for blinking leds" software.

A disapointed former user of DSP 56F807
Pantelis--- In m...@yahoogroups.com, "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
>  Tomer


_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3


_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3


I heartily agree with all of Robert Woods points.
 
At one time, the Motorola manuals were the easiest to read, there were plenty of examples and app notes, and writing for their microcontrollers and DSPs was almost a breeze.  Now, everything is hidden under piles of Metrowerks tools that are difficult to use.  I would welcome going back to the simpler approach that was a big part of Motorola's success years ago.

Robert Wood <r...@apostrophe.co.uk> wrote:
What really annoys me is that Motorola seem to be pushing you down this PE
route whether you want it or not. Personally, I hate this whole automatic
code generation thing. It's very difficult to see what's going on and it's
too easy to try and write code without really understanding the processor.

Maybe it's good for learners or people who are doing simple applications, but
when you want to squeeze all the performance you can out of a system or maybe
do something out of the ordinary, I'm sure it's not a good system. I'd like
to see standard header files being supplied with 6.x so that people can write
code easily in the traditional fashion. If Motorola are worried about people
getting peripherals up and running easily, example code would be a perfectly
good way of doing it.

I'm very suspicious about how bloaty the target software might end up being as
well.--- In m...@yahoogroups.com, "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
>  Tomer_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3

Yahoo! Groups Links



_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3


Kenneth Ciszewski wrote:

> I tend to agree that the Metrowerks-created tools are difficult to use.

Of course we don't feel that they are difficult to use but sometimes it is
hard for someone familiar to step back and see the problems others are
having.

I'd be interested in a survey, please just respond to me not everyone.

Would having free online courses for using our tools be of benefit?

How about more tutorials. What documentation is missing, what needs
improved.

What can we do to make this a faster more simpler system... which is what it
is meant to be?

Ron

--
Metrowerks, one of the worlds top 100 companies and influencers
in the software development industry. - SD Times May 2004
http://www.sdtimes.com/2004sdt100.htm

Metrowerks, maker of CodeWarrior
Ron Liechty - - http://www.metrowerks.com


Message
The Metrowerks tools take time to learn. But in my experience the code size on the DSP56F800, which only has 8K available, is reduced using PE. (I Don't understand why).
PE looks and feels more like Visual C++ environment. Unfortunately there are issues wrt to user-help and clear instructions on what files are created for each bean. This would help the user be able to optimize his project. There also needs to be more comments in the code generated by PE.
Overall if Unis get their act together and address these issues they will have a very good development environment.
 
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: Kenneth Ciszewski [mailto:k...@swbell.net]
Sent: 03 July 2004 19:38
To: flybot52; m...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [motoroladsp] Re: Processor Expert, your opinion, is it any good?

I tend to agree that the Metrowerks-created tools are difficult to use.

flybot52 <f...@yahoo.com> wrote:
If you are interested to make 1 or 2 leds  blink, PE is the right
software for you. Even in this case, you will have some problems.
Just visit the PE's site and you will notice that there is a patch
every 10days.  I spent more than 4 months to make a serious project
with this software but I had( and have) very serious problems.
I still use SDK for applications that need to work without problems.
All the applications I built with SDK, I built with PE as well and
all PE
projects are useless. Unfortunately Motorola doesn't support anymore
SDK and you cannot use it for new designs. PE is very good as idea,
but most probably will be good to use next year. In the meantime I
already ordered a development kit from TI and I am going to use TI's
DSPs in my new projects. I really spent a lot of time (and money) to
this "good for blinking leds" software.

A disapointed former user of DSP 56F807
Pantelis--- In m...@yahoogroups.com, "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
>  Tomer


_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3


_____________________________________
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:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Post:  m...@yahoogroups.com

To Leave: m...@yahoogroups.com

Archives: http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/motoroladsp

More Groups: http://www.dsprelated.com/groups.php3

--
The information in this email may be confidential, privileged and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. Unauthorised use, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. The views expressed in this e-mail are personal and may not necessarily reflect those of Edinburgh Instruments Ltd. or any of its divisions, unless explicitly stated otherwise. We do not accept any liability or responsibility for: (1) changes made to this email after it was sent, or (2) viruses transmitted through this email or any attachment. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the sender immediately and delete the message from your email.

For further information on Edinburgh Instruments please visit our website at http://www.edinst.com


--- In , "t_karin1" <tomerk@c...> wrote:
> I am using DSP56807 for 3 years now, using either the SDK (Ver 2.5)
> or my own functions to access the peripherals, and also using uCOS-
ii
> RTOS.
>
> I am considering changing the DSP to 568357, which has twice as
much
> internal flash.
> I noticed there is no SDK to the 5683xx Family and instead you need
> to use a new tool called Processor Expert and Beans.
>
> I looked into this Processor Expert and I started to miss the good
> old SDK. It seems to me that Processor Expert is good for Novice
> programmer, make it look more like Visual Basic. I do not like the
> idea that CodeWarrior and PE generate the code and the files for
me.
> I want to be able to control, understand and create each and every
> file and every line in my embedded system.
> I would like to ask programmers in this forum their opinion about
> Processor Expert
> Am I an old fashion control freak and Processor Expert does make
> things easier (even very complex embedded system) or does PE makes
it
> harder to create A complex system, and is good only for A small
> system?
> Do you think the PE is good or you also miss the SDK?
> How would you recommend switching from 80x family to 83xx family?
> let me know what you think
> Thanks
> Tomer

Processor Expert is really SDK++. All of the existing libraries and
most of applications from SDK were moved over into the PE
infrastructure. PE adds support for windows-based configuration of
peripherals and drivers.

PE also provides a low level interface to the hardware, similar to
the IOCTL calls found in SDK. Processor Expert Standard Library
(PESL) provides low level routines to manipulate the architecture.
Most PESL calls are just macros that produce one or two assembly
instructions.

With PESL you can write your own drivers, including initialization
code. However you can also use PE to just initialize your
peripherals using "init" beans and write the rest yourself.

One of the great improvements over SDK is that PE provides an
initialization inspector that will allow you to know exactly how each
peripheral is setup after boot. You can check the after boot content
of each peripheral register and even get a disassembled description
of each register. With SDK you had to dig this info out using the
debugger.

You can chose to develop your application using as much or as little
of PE as you chose:

* Write your application from scratch using CodeWarrior Stationery,
writing your own drivers, i.e. don't use PE at all.

* Use CPU bean in Processor Expert to take care of startup
configuration and write everything else using PESL or your own custom
code.

* Use CPU bean in PE and init beans for startup of CPU and initial
configuration of each peripheral. Write rest of drivers yourself.

* Use CPU bean and bean drivers from Processor Expert, freeze
(disable) Processor expert code generation, and then customize
selected drivers.

* Use CPU bean and bean drivers from Processor Expert, then customize
selected drivers by writing new beans based on the old ones.

*** So you can see that there is a wide range of uses for Processor
Expert in your application. *** It has been noted in other responses that Unis posts many updates to
PE on their website. If you actually look into the readme files for
each of these updates you will see that most of them reflect patches
focused on a few obscure issues rather than some deeper problem.
These patches allow you to get updated code sooner than waiting for
the next release of CodeWarrior.

Inside of CodeWarrior's online help you will find a quickstart guide
and tutorial for Processor Expert. The Accelerated Development
System Resource Pack CD that comes with every EVM has additional
lessons on Processor Expert. Freescale and Unis can also support you
with additional training in the use of CodeWarrior and Processor
Expert. Classes exist on beginning, intermediate, and expert PE use.


--- In , "Jason Keddie"
<jason.keddie@e...> wrote:
> The Metrowerks tools take time to learn. But in my experience the
code size on the DSP56F800, which only has 8K available, is reduced
using PE. (I Don't understand why). PE looks and feels more like
Visual C++ environment. Unfortunately there are issues wrt to user-
help and clear instructions on what files are created for each bean.
This would help the user be able to optimize his project. There also
needs to be more comments in the code generated by PE.
>
> Overall if Unis get their act together and address these issues
they will have a very good development environment.
>
> Jason

There are a few simple rules that can easily improve the memory
footprint of a PE based project. In order of return on effort, they
are:

1) Minimize data memory use by reducing heap space.
- Are you using malloc at all? The standard linker command file has
lots of space reserved for heap. Look under the build options tab of
the CPU bean.

2) Minimize data memory by reducing stack space.
- Use the stack check routines built into the tools library.
Measure the high water mark for stack usage, add some windage, and
then minimize stack allocation. (See CPU bean, build options tab).

3) The linker will deadstrip unused code, but unused methods and
events may leave initialization code in the Processor Expert startup
code. Remove all unused events (ISRs) and methods. (If you trim too
much you will get a compile error alerting you to an unprototyped
call.)