Forum Rule: Always post complete source code & details to reproduce any issue!
Page 17 of 23 FirstFirst ... 7 15 16 17 18 19 ... LastLast
Results 401 to 425 of 560

Thread: Any Chance of a Teensy ++ 3.1?

  1. #401
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    20,322
    Isn't uTasker a one-time fee of $485 or $765? (and thereafter, you use it royalty free, regardless of how many copies you ship) Does a "low cost retail product" mean something that's manufactured in China in at 50,000 to 250,000 quantity? If you think $500 is too much for a one-time expense, and you really are developing a high-volume retail product, I'm sure you'll have plenty of unpleasant experiences along the way!

    But if you really want free, I believe Frank is working on this right now and just published something yesterday. Maybe you should give Frank's code a try. If it doesn't fully meet all your needs, maybe you could help to improve it?

    As far as PJRC is concerned, I hear your "have a leg up on the Arduino camp" thought. Really, I do. I've seen you're asking the same thing on their forum too.

    Just to be perfectly clear, I'm not planning to work on this feature, at least not anytime soon. Part of my reasoning is uTasker and Frank are already on it. But mostly, I have an incredibly long list of other far more urgent things in development. Some examples: USB MTP & Audio, Teensy++ 3.x, completing the SD library optimizations, further pre-fetching and DMA optimizations on SD when we get Teensy++ hardware, ways to enable SWD/JTAG debug, about 100 feature requests on the Audio library, and the upcoming motion+light+sound peripheral board (oh, look, another new product hint leaked....)

    FWIW, uTasker has been around for a very long time and has a very impressive list of features. Until recently, much of that stuff didn't have any usable free alternatives. Arduino and FreeRTOS and other projects are slowly changing the landscape, much like how Linux shook up the commercial Unix marketplace 15+ years ago. Long term, I and Frank and many others will probably do all this stuff and much, much more. But it's a very long and slow process. Much of the work is open source contributions by unpaid volunteers, and people like me who are financially supported by sales of low-cost products. With cheap Asian clones and subsidized hardware from semiconductor manufacturers flooding the market, it's a very indirect and slow approach (burdened with running a hardware company) compared to traditional software licensing revenue. The way this open source stuff works is you roll up your sleeves and contribute.

  2. #402
    Senior Member+ Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany NRW
    Posts
    5,679
    No,its not released and closed source until it is tested. I'm still searching betatesters.

  3. #403
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    227
    >Does a "low cost retail product" mean something that's manufactured in China in at 50,000 to 250,000 quantity?
    No. My product will have low volume production and sales market (<1000). Very narrow vertical market. I'm doing the manufacturing myself and in the US, not China.

    >But if you really want free
    I never said I wanted free. Where on earth did you get that from? I said companies are entitled to an ROI. Just like you are.

    >Just to be perfectly clear, I'm not planning to work on this feature.
    Now we know...thanks for the answer.

    >The way this open source stuff works is you roll up your sleeves and contribute.
    I would love to do that but I don't think my skill set is high enough for a project like this (in other words, I'm not smart enough). As you may have seen in another thread I responded to someone who said there isn't much memory available to do this kind of thing and I said I have several years of assembly language experience and if someone could help guide me on where to focus I wouldn't mind rolling up my sleeves and taking a crack at writing some small assembler code. The response was that 'C would be better' and have about a 4 times smaller foot print than assembler. That didn't make sense from what I've learned and have read re assembly code vs C generated code, but I figured maybe he knows more about that than me.

    Anyway, thanks for jumping into the thread Paul with your thoughts.

  4. #404
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Portland OR
    Posts
    633
    Quote Originally Posted by rfresh737 View Post
    The response was that 'C would be better' and have about a 4 times smaller foot print than assembler.
    Maybe I misunderstood, but if you mean http://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?to...222#msg2423222 then "1-2 KLOC in C" to me means between one and two thousand lines of C code. But usually 1 line of C code != 1 line of assembly code.

  5. #405
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by JBeale View Post
    Maybe I misunderstood, but if you mean http://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?to...222#msg2423222 then "1-2 KLOC in C" to me means between one and two thousand lines of C code. But usually 1 line of C code != 1 line of assembly code.
    Right, that is correct. But it isn't how many lines of code that is the primary concern, it's what is the end result memory foot print? If a boot loader off of the SD card can be done in assembly with a small enough foot print, then I think its worth the extra lines of asm code (yes, many extra lines). In fact, in some hardware cases, it may be the only way to make it happen.

    Again, I don't have a PHD in computer science, but I have programmed for a few years in C and a few years in 8088/8086 assembler, so I know how tedious assembly is to code. But I guess I'm an odd duck, because I loved to write code in assembly when I was doing it. Something about having the absolute control down into the bowls of the CPU registers...I just loved it. I used Borlands Turbo Assembler and Microsoft's MASM and Tlink.

  6. #406
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    So. Calif
    Posts
    2,828
    Sounds like you've misunderstood that uTasker's project price is one time - not recurring per board.

    Quote Originally Posted by rfresh737 View Post
    I have absolutely no problem paying for hardware/software and I've bought lots of both. Companies are entitled to earn some ROI for their time and their products. However, uTasker is on another planet with their commercial pricing for their SD card boot solution. Maybe they assume everyone who is using a Teensy for a commercial product is charging $1,000.00+ for their product.
    If you value your time do develop a bootloader with proper IP rights, you'll sped a lot more than the < $500 license fee.

  7. #407
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    227
    >Sounds like you've misunderstood that uTasker's project price is one time - not recurring per board.

    Nope, I understand their pricing structure.

  8. #408
    Senior Member+ Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany NRW
    Posts
    5,679
    @rfresh737 , what would be a fair price for a sd-bootloader ?

  9. #409
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    227
    Based on looking at the many (and there a lot!) add-on hardware products that are available for both the Ardunio and the Teensy boards, they all seem (a general statement) to have prices in in the range of $10.00 to $50.00 or more, depending. I think for our tiny board community, we are 'used' to these lower price points for an add-on/shield. I would say an SD Card shield that would allow loading a .hex file off of the card at power up, $25.00 to $50.00 would be a reasonable price point.

    However, that being said, you're building one for the market, so you obviously know a lot more about the details of it than I do. Perhaps it turns out that it cannot be done for that price range. If so, it just means I will have to do without one and figure out something else to update my code in the field.

  10. #410
    Senior Member+ Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany NRW
    Posts
    5,679
    rfresh737@ The bootloader is only a piece of software (Of course it needs a sd-slot, but it can be shared with the application).
    What's a fair price for such a solution ?

    $25-$50: Perhaps it would be more easy/cheap to send a new teensy to your customers (?!)

  11. #411
    Senior Member+ manitou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,092
    Cortex 4 play with the Freescale FRDM-K64F?

    I'm thinking of playing with mbed cortex-M4F (MK64FN1M0VLL12),
    https://developer.mbed.org/platforms/FRDM-K64F/
    same family as MK66FX1M0. One could build some tests with the "modest" mbed libraries, but maybe if teensyduino had a 120 MHz build option for the MK66FX1M0, then one could drag-and-drop the teensy bin onto the mbed K64F ...

    UPDATE:
    I'll update this post with my experiences on K64F
    • Clocks: cpu/bus/ram 120/60/24 MHz, 32khz RTC crystal, 25mhz ether crystal provides 50mhz to MCU
    • measured PULLUP resistance on a few pins, 42Kohms
    • hardware RNG, speed 7.5 mbs, NIST tests look good
    • Ethernet just worked, static IP or DNS, ARP, ICMP, UDP 8-byte latency 288us, TCP xmit 26 mbs, recv 21 mbs, UDP xmit 52mbs, recv 4mbs, UDP line-speed burst of 1000-byte packets, only 7 received, ping rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.169/0.174/0.178/0.010 ms. multicast/IGMP worked (though not with -O3 for CRC/hash)
    • linpack: float 12.9mflops, double 0.9 mflops (hardware float)
    • memcpy() 1143 mbs, quadword DMA memory-to-memory 1424.7 mbs
    • teensy 3.1 SPI FIFO speedups work, get 27.3 mbs with 30MHz SPI CLK, SPI DMA works
    • FastCRC lib works benchmark
    • Frank B reports K64F can overclock F_BUS
    • SDHC module for microSD access, early tests
    • POWER: loop() 139 ma with hacked USB cable, Revised 1/31/17 142.5 ma, jumper JP20 measure just MCU current = 42.2 ma; consumers ? ether PHY 46ma, SDA 17ma, ?LDO, USB, LEDs ....??

    Ethernet hardware has lots of accelerator options, but I don't know how much of that HAL libraries utilize. The mbed board has a PHY chip and RJ45 connector. lwIP provides TCP/UDP/IP services with thread/mutex/mbox from CMSIS-RTOS

    There is also a crypto-acceleration unit (CAU) that can speedup software DES/AES/SHA/MD5. Freescale has an assembler wrapper at
    http://www.freescale.com/products/ar...-library:CAUAP
    The CAU speeds the time-critical crypto operations, and the library only accesses those basic operations, so you still need to add logic for padding hash input and doing CBC encryption. The Freescale library is in GNU C/assembler so it doesn't work with MBED on-line compiler. I exported the GNU GCC MBED build environment to test the CAU library on K64F @ 120MHz.
    Code:
                     CAU        C     TLS
    MD5 (KBs)      10964      5471   6693
    SHA256(KBs)     3322      2165   2090
    AES set key(us)    3        25      7      128-bit key
    AES CBC (us)      11       189     74       64 bytes
      12/10/18 NXP now supports CAU in mbedtls and wolfssl. mbedtls with and without CAU
                     CAU      no
    SHA256(KBs)     2546     1674
    AESCBC(KBs)     3002      772
    The fusion sensor algorithms for the prop shield are very float-intensive. In the table below are times for Paul's NXP kalman filter and the Madgwick and Mahony algorithms on the Teensy 3.2 and the mbed Cortex M4f (hardware floating point) NXP K64f (120MHz) and NUCLEO (180MHz).
    Code:
                                   Time (microseconds)
    Algorithm                  t3.2@120mhz      k64f     nucleo@180mhz
    Kalman                        3648           467       308
    Madgwick                       224             8         6
    Mahony                         127             6         3
    Madgwick (onehorse)            216             6         5
    Mahony                         133             5         3
    The mbed MK64F also has an onboard FXOS8700Q (also on teensy prop shield)

    Unlike the LC, this MCU is very close to teensy3.1, so not very many porting issues IMHO. MK64F digital pins are 5v tolerant, but no capacitive touch pins.

    Ethernet config:
    Uses lwIP with RTOS. ring descriptors (16 RX, 8 TX), 1522-byte buffers 16-byte aligned. zero-copy for transmit. etherperf sketch uses 67KB flash and 55KB RAM. Board's PHY is micrel KSZ8081RNACNA.

    some of the hardware registers
    Code:
            MPU->RGDAAC[0] 0x61f7df    7/19/16
           SIM->SOPT2 0x211000
           SIM->SCGC2 0x1
           ENET->PALR 0x4e408c86
           ENET->PAUR 0xfed8808
           ENET->EIR 0x0
           ENET->EIMR 0xa000000
           ENET->ECR 0xf0000102
           ENET->MSCR 0x130
           ENET->MRBR 0x600
           ENET->RCR 0x5f2c124
           ENET->TCR 0x4
           ENET->TACC 0x1
           ENET->RACC 0xc0
           ENET->MMFR 0x607a0116
           ENET->TFWR 0x100     fifo
           ENET->RSFL 0x0
           ENET->RSEM 0x0
           ENET->RAFL 0x4
           ENET->RAEM 0x4
    Paul is also considering the MK64FX512.

    See coremark plots

    Teensy K66 beta testing announced 6/9/16 and K66/K64 kickstarter August, 2016.
    Last edited by manitou; 07-17-2019 at 11:22 AM.

  12. #412
    Senior Member+ MichaelMeissner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ayer Massachussetts
    Posts
    3,077
    FWIW, over in the Adafruit forum, a user asked for the maximum number of analog inputs he could access from a Raspberry Pi via i2c controllers (24 using 4 boards that provide 8 inputs was his current solution). I mentioned the Teensy 3.2 had 21 inputs, and he was intrigued by it (particularly since a Teensy 3.2 cost less than one of the devices that only gave 8 inputs).

    So while most of the discussion for the Teensy 3.1++ has been on more buses (i2c, spi, i2s, etc.), there are some potential users that want more analog input pins. I didn't re-read the entire thread, but it looked like the most analog inputs of the K66 would be 25, but only 14 had been allocated to pins. For those users, the Teensy 3.2 may be more appropriate than the Teensy 3++.

  13. #413
    Senior Member+ Theremingenieur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Colmar, France
    Posts
    2,457
    ... or using a single Teensy 3.x and a few 74HC4053 analog multiplexers could do the job, too.

  14. #414
    Senior Member+ MichaelMeissner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ayer Massachussetts
    Posts
    3,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Theremingenieur View Post
    ... or using a single Teensy 3.x and a few 74HC4053 analog multiplexers could do the job, too.
    That is good to know, thanks.

  15. #415
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    20,322
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelMeissner View Post
    For those users, the Teensy 3.2 may be more appropriate than the Teensy 3++.
    The current plan has 23 analog pins, with 19 exposed on the outside breadboard-friendly edges.

    That's not a huge step up from 21 analog pins, but only 10 of those are exposed on the edges on Teensy 3.x.

  16. #416
    Senior Member+ Theremingenieur's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Colmar, France
    Posts
    2,457
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    The current plan has 23 analog pins, with 19 exposed on the outside breadboard-friendly edges.

    That's not a huge step up from 21 analog pins, but only 10 of those are exposed on the edges on Teensy 3.x.
    Are we entitled to see that current plan, even if it is only scribble by hand? Please accept my apologies for being curious!

  17. #417
    Senior Member+ MichaelMeissner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ayer Massachussetts
    Posts
    3,077
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    The current plan has 23 analog pins, with 19 exposed on the outside breadboard-friendly edges.

    That's not a huge step up from 21 analog pins, but only 10 of those are exposed on the edges on Teensy 3.x.
    Thanks for the update.

    I look forward to the new processor as well as the new shield/cape/whatever you mentioned in another post.

  18. #418
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    20,322
    Quote Originally Posted by Theremingenieur View Post
    Are we entitled to see that current plan, even if it is only scribble by hand? Please accept my apologies for being curious!
    Please understand the sensitive nature of early disclosure. I've probably already shared too much....

  19. #419
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    20,322
    Quote Originally Posted by manitou View Post
    There is also a crypto-acceleration unit that can speedup software DES/AES/SHA/MD5.
    Freescale has an app note about power line harmonic analysis which hints that the crypto unit can be programmed to accelerate 2nd and 3rd order polynomial interpolation.

    One of the *many* things I'm excited to try is using the crypto unit to efficiently resample between 44.1 & 48 kHz audio rates.

  20. #420
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    651
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Please understand the sensitive nature of early disclosure. I've probably already shared too much....
    'Waits for men in black'

  21. #421
    Senior Member+ manitou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,092
    so as i begin to understand how the Ethernet might work, will the board include a PHY chip or at least the PHY GPIO pins accessible?
    the MBED K64F mentioned above has a 25MHz crystal to the PHY chip, the PHY provides the 50MHz external clock to the Cortex MCU. How will the ++3 be clocked?
    Last edited by manitou; 11-14-2015 at 01:40 PM.

  22. #422
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    124
    Have you guys seen the new SparkFun SAMD21 Mini Breakout?
    Despite is not even close to the power of Teensy 3.X (the microcontroller is more close to Teensy-LC costing almost twice) I like that it comes already with RTC crystal and an integrated LiPo charger.
    I would love to see those on Teensy 3.X++

  23. #423
    Senior Member+ Frank B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany NRW
    Posts
    5,679
    Quote Originally Posted by vitormhenrique View Post
    Have you guys seen the new SparkFun SAMD21 Mini Breakout?
    Despite is not even close to the power of Teensy 3.X (the microcontroller is more close to Teensy-LC costing almost twice) I like that it comes already with RTC crystal and an integrated LiPo charger.
    I would love to see those on Teensy 3.X++
    I don't think that more than 1% users need a lipo-charger...

  24. #424
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank B View Post
    I don't think that more than 1% users need a lipo-charger...
    Well, I think is very difficult for you to guess the percentage of users that need / want a feature unless you sell / provide both options and have a real world data to talk percentages.

    Another thing is that, adding a feature, by adding a 10 cents part (on my opinion) doesn't hurt.

  25. #425
    Senior Member joe_prince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by vitormhenrique View Post
    Another thing is that, adding a feature, by adding a 10 cents part (on my opinion) doesn't hurt.
    I imagine it's more a factor of space, versus cost. It's not going to be called a Teensy anymore if it's loaded up with components

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •