[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [avr-gcc-list] using the 43USB355 (was - Using IAR compile d lib

From: Bryan Jarmain
Subject: RE: [avr-gcc-list] using the 43USB355 (was - Using IAR compile d lib with GCC?)
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 17:32:38 +0200

The 355 seems to be a really nice device (even without the HUB), but the USB
configuration side seems to be very difficult to configure, and example code
would go a long way in making the device more usable.

I never immagined that the hub would have firmware that would need to be
protected - logically and traditionally these types of propriatry features
are typically hidden in hardware. I believe that if the hub firmware needs
to be protected, this could be most elegantly done in a separate "hub
library" - but this is just my own speculative opinion.

So, function only example firmware would be really great and helpfull. 
It would help substantually with using the device more efficiently. An open
function only library would also serve a similar purpose, and would be
usefull to many other potential users.

I look forward to your success in getting this open function code together


-----Original Message-----
From: Keith Gudger [mailto:address@hidden 
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 5:12 PM
To: Jason Kyle
Cc: Bryan Jarmain; address@hidden
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] using the 43USB355 (was - Using IAR compiled lib
with GCC?)

Here is the story about the 355 libraries.  The reason for not releasing
the source code is to protect the code for the hub.  If you look around,
you will find that "other USB devices" are function only.  Sorry, but it
appears we have something worth protecting in the hub.

Are you are building a function only device?  If so, maybe I should put
together code that works only for a function.  Maybe the boss will let me
release that source code?  If that's what you want, I'll look into
releasing a GCC version.


On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Jason Kyle wrote:

> At 09:24 01/09/2003 +0200, Bryan Jarmain wrote:
> >I recently tried to use the AT43USB355, but could not get the USB side to
> >work, even after quite considerable effort. I found the root cause to be
> >inadequately and inaccurately documented hardware (USB) functionality.
> >rest of the device seemed easy enough to use (although considering there
> >no emulator support - I implemented a 115kbaud bit-bang serial port in
> >software for this purpose).
> >
> >Atmel sent me some beta 43USB355 USB libraries with a wizard (I believe
> >may be properly released now), but I was reluctant to use them because
> >source code was not open (proprietary) - I don't believe using closed
> >libraries is an industrial standard way of writing firmware. Especially
> >the library having such a fundamental influence on the firmware structure
> >(e.g. no main function in your C code). They also didn't provide other
> >source-code examples on how to use their USB hardware features - I
> >even initialize the USB functionality.
> >
> >Anyway, to cut a long story short I decided it would be prudent to find a
> >better documented USB device (where I had better knowledge and
> >of what was happening behind the scenes), until Atmel decides to better
> >document the 43USB355 (and hopefully expose their library source code
> >
> >All this was a pity because the 43USB355 seems to be a very nice
> >microprocessor with lots of promise. Currently it is probably very usable
> >for anyone who is prepared to use Wizards and Proprietary Libraries (they
> >claim their libraries are quite stable - I have no reason to doubt this).
> >just believe it still needs a bit of work from their side before it
> >a widely acceptable micro.
> Next year we should see some decent USB micros from Atmel, the current
> is based around the original AVR core.  Hopefully Atmel (hint hint) will 
> prepare both open (for gcc) and proprietary (for IAR C & others) libraries

> for the new batch of USB AVR's.  All this proprietary talk reminds me of 
> the FPSLIC devices, is anybody still using them?
> Jason Kyle
> >Has anyone been successful with this device (without using their
> >If anyone has had success and has source-code to share, I would be very
> >interested to see some example code on the hardware interface.
> >
> >Bryan
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Keith Gudger [mailto:address@hidden
> >Sent: Friday, August 29, 2003 6:14 PM
> >To: Tim Lapawa
> >Cc: address@hidden
> >Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] Using IAR compiled lib with GCC?
> >
> >I have USB libraries for the AT43USB35x USB AVRs, compiled for GCC.  I
> >haven't gotten the 320 libraries compiled for GCC yet, but there is a
> >io43u32x.h file, and one can set -mmcu=at43usb320. (WinAVR release, at
> >least).
> >
> >I can send you the 35x files anytime, but I will have to compile the 32x
> >libraries next week (when I'm back from vacation ;) ).
> >
> >Keith
> >
> >On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Tim Lapawa wrote:
> >
> > > Hello list,
> > >
> > > atmel send me a proprietary library for the AT43USB320 SDK kit.
> > > It's an 4port USB Hub with integrated 8515 integrated.
> > > But they do not want to send me the firmwares source code.
> > > They send me libraries compiled with the IAR and the Imagecraft
> > > Can I use these libs with the GNU toolchain?
> > > I've read in this list, that the IAR and the GNU compiler use
> > > different registers for Stack- and Framepointer.
> > > And what is about parameter passing in function calls?
> > >
> > >
> > > Greetings Tim Lapawa
> > > --
> _______________________________________________
> avr-gcc-list mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://www.avr1.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]