Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - erikm

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8
46
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Debug of no_touch935
« on: January 08, 2007, 07:34:40 am »
I have no idea what you are doing, the NoTouch process when properly implemented load both the dptr and the acc before calling the IAP

Erik

47
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: ISP? ICP? IAP?
« on: December 22, 2006, 10:14:19 am »
OK, so what i am getting is that NoTouch is only for ISP but then there is no need for power cycling the Vdd and playing with the reset, etc., BUT there could be issues if the NoTouch is not programmed correctly the first time and something goes wrong, in which case it's time to solder a new chip in.

On the other hand, the advantages / disadvantages of ICP are that because it is hardware driven, there is no issue with the LPC9xx getting into a curare-like paralysis state BUT there is all that extra hardware to deal with.

i won't even attempt to figure out IAP...

Is this about right?


1) if you install NoTouch for use and 'the backdoor' for safety, the only case where you will need to "solder a new chip in" is some instances where something goes wring while FlashMagic is programming the chip no other cases
2) for the sahe of "belt, suspenders and a piece of rope" my boards have a connector for an external 'wiggle the bits" circuit/  Should I lose some chips I will make that board (have had no reason to)
30 even if you decide to go totally for "wiggle the bits" if you make the wiggle circuitry external, you do not have to repeat it for every board you make.  Yes, the connector will need to be laid out so a couple of "shorting plugs" e.g. Vcc can be inserted for normal operation.

Merry Christmas to all

Erik"

48
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: ISP? ICP? IAP?
« on: December 22, 2006, 10:12:45 am »
OK, so what i am getting is that NoTouch is only for ISP but then there is no need for power cycling the Vdd and playing with the reset, etc., BUT there could be issues if the NoTouch is not programmed correctly the first time and something goes wrong, in which case it's time to solder a new chip in.

On the other hand, the advantages / disadvantages of ICP are that because it is hardware driven, there is no issue with the LPC9xx getting into a curare-like paralysis state BUT there is all that extra hardware to deal with.

i won't even attempt to figure out IAP...

Is this about right?


1) if you install NoTouch for use and 'the backdoor' for safety, the only case where you will need to "solder a new chip in" is some instances where something goes wring while FlashMagic is programming the chip no other cases
2) for the sake of "belt, suspenders and a piece of rope" my boards have a connector for an external 'wiggle the bits" circuit.  Should I lose some chips I will make that board (have had no reason to so far)
3) even if you decide to go totally for "wiggle the bits" if you make the wiggle circuitry external, you do not have to repeat it for every board you make.  Yes, the connector will need to be laid out so a couple of "shorting plugs" e.g. Vcc can be inserted for normal operation.

Merry Christmas to all

Erik

49
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: ISP? ICP? IAP?
« on: December 22, 2006, 06:04:48 am »
OK, so what i am getting is that NoTouch is only for ISP but then there is no need for power cycling the Vdd and playing with the reset, etc., BUT there could be issues if the NoTouch is not programmed correctly the first time and something goes wrong, in which case it's time to solder a new chip in.

On the other hand, the advantages / disadvantages of ICP are that because it is hardware driven, there is no issue with the LPC9xx getting into a curare-like paralysis state BUT there is all that extra hardware to deal with.

i won't even attempt to figure out IAP...

Is this about right?


1) if you add "the backdoor" at the right place the only case you may need to "solder a new chip in" is failure during programming the chip.  Not 'bad code' not any other case except failure in that exact time slot.  In some cases, even that will not make you 'lose' the chip.
2) the kick the uC into ISP circuitry can be added externally in which case you do not need to add it to every board you make.

What I do is install NoTouch for convenience, "the backdoor" for emergency and, should I ever need to I will make the xternal "kick" circuitry, I have, for the sake of "belt, suspenders and a piece of rope" the connector for the "kick circuitry" on my boards with a 'shorting nugget' on the Vcc interrupt pins

Erik


50
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: ISP? ICP? IAP?
« on: December 21, 2006, 01:30:00 pm »
OK, so what i am getting is that NoTouch is only for ISP but then there is no need for power cycling the Vdd and playing with the reset, etc., BUT there could be issues if the NoTouch is not programmed correctly the first time and something goes wrong, in which case it's time to solder a new chip in.

On the other hand, the advantages / disadvantages of ICP are that because it is hardware driven, there is no issue with the LPC9xx getting into a curare-like paralysis state BUT there is all that extra hardware to deal with.


yes and no
1) if you add "the backdoor" (IMMEDIATELY at Startup:) the only case where NoTouch will leave a chip dead is if you do not complete a program download.  I always implement NoTouch for convenience and the backdoor for safety.
2) the "fiddle the pins" can be implemented as an external circuit, then you do not need copy it on each and every board you make.

Erik

51
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: ISP? ICP? IAP?
« on: December 20, 2006, 06:54:04 am »
Yes controlling  Vdd of the "target"  LPC935 (or any of the LPC900 series in general) for ISP or ICP is nessecary  Unless you use NoTouch!

if you use NoTouch and install it the very first (and, since it will be part of your code every time thereafter) you need no, none, zero, nada "control signals", just the serial

NoTouch works with ISP, NOT ICP

Erik

52
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Work with 2 P89LPC935
« on: December 14, 2006, 06:10:45 am »
After that I call the notouch(), Must i do a reset of the device?
No, if you do that you will not be able to program.  However, in some cases you may need to reset the chip when FlashMagic is done

Erik

53
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Work with 2 P89LPC935
« on: December 14, 2006, 06:08:56 am »
Ok, but, Must i have the break detect enable, or not?,
With NoTouch, you do not need the break detect; however Id recommend to install the 'safety' descriibed in "the backdoor"
Using NoTouch and "the backdoor" you will need to remove the chip or take other means only in one case: if power fails during programming.

With No_touch, Can I program the same device more than once?
yes, but it is essential that you get NoTouch in on the first programming of a new chip

for use no_touch, Must I use hyperterminal of Windows, or the Terminal of flashMagic, no?
you can probably use any of the above, I believe, but the only verification of NoTouch known to me is with using FlashMagic

Erik

PS it is NoTouch, not no_touch

54
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Work with 2 P89LPC935
« on: December 12, 2006, 02:34:52 pm »
I have connected the 31 uC to the same Serial Line (RS232).
first, how close are these devices, running IIC for any distance is very 'dangerous'
second if all are sharing the same MAX232  equivalent, the how far apply again.

now, if they are close and you can program them individually the first time only then replace your NoTouch activate 'F' with "NODE1", "NODE2" ... for the slaves then NoTouch will only open one device. You need to program them once (no reset required - new chips are in ISP mode) to get NoTouch in.

What I would do, however, would be to get rid of the parallelled serial and program the slaves vis IIC using the ICP code.

Erik

55
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Work with 2 P89LPC935
« on: December 12, 2006, 08:52:37 am »
I have a board that create the signal of RST (the three pulses), and in this board i have a jumper for transmiting the RST to one or other device.

In the code i have put the no_touch935() in this form:


you are mixing the reset initialize and the NoTouch initialize.  You can, of course use both, should you so desire, but, in that case, make the "NoTouch activator" different.

I do not quite understand I use one Serial of my computer for programing two P89LPC935 do they share the connector on your uC board?

You do know that 'factory fresh' chips arrive in ISP mode?

Erik

56
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: ISP? ICP? IAP?
« on: December 07, 2006, 05:51:42 am »
search for "no touch" I think this is a solution for you

A note from the author:
Read all the NoTouch documents, the NoTouch for LPC does not have "the words"

Erik



57
General / Re: Flash Magic & USB Port
« on: November 27, 2006, 05:39:24 am »
yes, you can use a GOOD one, get a bargain one and you can not.  Search for posts on this subject and you will find "this brand does not work" and "this brand works".  You can even find "if the chip inside is xxx it will not work".

Erik


58
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Problems with P89LPC935
« on: November 20, 2006, 06:03:13 am »
wherever you want
examples
at SRATUP: if TxD is held low (known as 'the backdoor')
if a string e.g. "QWERTY" is received serailly
if 1 and 7 are pressed simullatneously
if p1,4 is pulled down
if ,,,,

Erik


59
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Problems with P89LPC935
« on: November 17, 2006, 05:12:45 am »
I would never get the idea that there was an error in the hardware of an 3rd party!


did you start in this business yesterday? :)


60
LPC9xx/LPC9xxx / Re: Problems with P89LPC935
« on: November 16, 2006, 07:41:38 am »
there is a link to NoTouch at this site.  READ about NoTouch for the P89C (that is where the explanations are) and use the NoTouch for LPC

Erik


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 8