Forum Rule: Always post complete source code & details to reproduce any issue!
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Plans for Teensy 3.1 with MINI54TAN?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    5

    Plans for Teensy 3.1 with MINI54TAN?

    What are the plans for the Teensy 3.1 since the MINI54TAN chip will be obsolete soon?

  2. #2
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    22,115
    There's actually 2 plans...

    We currently have a large number of the MINI54TAN parts, enough to last about 6 months.

    Short-term, I've got some of the newer MINI54TDE parts here for testing. After Teensy-LC is released, a bootloader upgrade to fix the pin 33 issue is pretty high on my priority list. I'm going to test with both 'TAN and 'TDE, so we'll be able to use either.

    Longer-term, the plan is to switch Teensy 3.1 to the KL02 part which is on Teensy-LC.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    So. Calif
    Posts
    2,828
    Request: New bootloader have some means to optionally not erase the top n sectors.

  4. #4
    @PaulStoffregen: I'm working on rev 3 of a prototype that has a footprint for the Teensy Loader MINI54LAN chip. I don't see any major pinout differences between the MINI54LAN and MINI54LDE.

    Do you plan to offer the MINI54LDE with Teensy Loader installed once your stock of MINI54LAN is gone?

  5. #5
    The answer I received by email was "yes"

  6. #6
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    22,115
    Yup, I've got some of the "DE" parts right here. I'll be testing with them when I work on the pin 33 issue.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    179
    Oof, first I'm hearing of this. Wonderful! Is the DE a drop-in replacement for those of us with custom boards?

  8. #8
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    22,115
    The new DE parts are a drop-in replacement.

    Internally, the DE chip has some additional power saving modes and other minor changes, which is why I need to test carefully to make sure the next rev works on both AN and DE.

  9. #9
    Member mixania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    Longer-term, the plan is to switch Teensy 3.1 to the KL02 part which is on Teensy-LC.
    What would be the benefits? I was thinking of getting the Teensy-LC but got the 3.1 instead since I wanted the full juice. The Teensy-LC's low cost concept certainly pays a toll on the processor specs.

    I hope something like the MINI54TDE won't be the sequel of Teensy's 3.1 processor. 24 MHz, no overlock? (seriously?). I certainly can't argue with the low power Cotex-M0 abilities thought, thats for sure.

  10. #10
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    22,115
    I have no plans to ever make a Teensy where any Nuvoton part is the main chip you program.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Portland OR
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by mixania View Post
    I hope something like the MINI54TDE won't be the sequel of Teensy's 3.1 processor.
    I believe the MINI54 device is used only for the bootloader on Teensy 3.0, 3.1 and LC; the previous MINI54TAN flavor is becoming obsolete so Paul's testing an updated version going forward- again, presumably just bootloader function.

  12. #12
    Member mixania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by JBeale View Post
    I believe the MINI54 device is used only for the bootloader on Teensy 3.0, 3.1 and LC; the previous MINI54TAN flavor is becoming obsolete so Paul's testing an updated version going forward- again, presumably just bootloader function.
    I see, that solved my confusion

  13. #13
    MINI54TAN? "Mini Satan?"

  14. #14
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    22,115
    LOL, yes!! Especially its low power features. Buggy and terribly difficult to use.

  15. #15
    Member mixania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    LOL, yes!! Especially its low power features. Buggy and terribly difficult to use.
    I can trust more a statement from an actual engineer rather than some broucher braging about low-power features.
    Last edited by mixania; 03-22-2015 at 03:11 AM. Reason: Grammar

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulStoffregen View Post
    LOL, yes!! Especially its low power features. Buggy and terribly difficult to use.
    When I wrote a DMA WS2812 driver for Raspberry Pi last year, I learned something very important: What it says in the programmer's manual, and what was actually put onto the chip, are often two different things!!!

  17. #17
    Senior Member PaulStoffregen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    22,115
    Yup, that can be terribly frustrating.

    Nuvoton generally documents all their features, sometimes in broken English, and sometimes with very confusing wording. That's the easy part. The hard part is the errata, which they don't publish. I'm sure if they did, it would be much longer than the entire reference manual.

  18. #18
    The RasPi's PWM and DMA engines have the same problem, unpublished errata. It took me a while to figure out that the PWM engine needs to be "massaged" to operate like the manual says it should.

Posting Permissions

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