6502.org Forum  Projects  Code  Documents  Tools  Forum
It is currently Sat May 25, 2024 11:01 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2009 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 7:22 am
Posts: 259
Location: Heerlen, NL
fachat wrote:
Hi Ruud, did you look at my SD-Card interface?

YES, this is what I'm looking for: simple and 6502 driven!
Thank you very much !!!

_________________
Code:
    ___
   / __|__
  / /  |_/     Groetjes, Ruud
  \ \__|_\
   \___|       URL: www.baltissen.org



Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 12:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 9:02 pm
Posts: 1687
Location: Sacramento, CA
I have updated the 65SPI project on my website. I had originally set all of the Slave Select (SS) outputs to default to low. However, most if not all SPI devices have active-low SS pins. I have updated the device to initialize with the SS pins high and updated the datasheet accordingly.

Thanks to Andre for pointing this out. I had corrected this with the SBC-3 and SBC-4 versions, but forgot to go back to the original 65SPI and fix it there.

Here's a link to the 65SPI Page:

http://sbc.rictor.org/io/65spi.html

There's a download link at the bottom of the page.

Daryl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 12:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:22 pm
Posts: 483
Location: Australia
One thing to note on the topic of the XC9572 CPLD is that Rochester Electronics are still making them. Trouble with them is that they have a minimum purchase price of $100(probably USD) on them, and unfortunately, they aren't available in PLCC, but it appears that the 3.3v ones(100-pin TQFP only) can be run at 5v(just from a quick look at the datasheet).

These might be viable, but it may be a bit of a pain to do. It would probably need a breakout board(in my ignorant opinion).

Many thanks to Dr Jefyll for bringing up Rochester Electronics, here.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 1:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: Midwestern USA
DerTrueForce wrote:
One thing to note on the topic of the XC9572 CPLD is that Rochester Electronics are still making them. Trouble with them is that they have a minimum purchase price of $100(probably USD) on them...

Just to be unambiguous, Rochester has a 100 dollar minimum per order, not per item.

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 4:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 10:22 pm
Posts: 483
Location: Australia
Ooh, good thing you picked up on that, BDD. That would've bit someone where it hurt.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 5:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:50 pm
Posts: 3354
Location: Ontario, Canada
DerTrueForce wrote:
Many thanks to Dr Jefyll for bringing up Rochester Electronics, here.
You're welcome! But I'm just as surprised as you are. (I only searched a few parts, but I found stuff I thought I'd never see again.)

BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
Just to be unambiguous, Rochester has a 100 dollar minimum per order, not per item.
Huh? Are we looking at the same site?? What I get is 100 dollar minimum per line (ie, quantity of a single item), and a 250 dollar minimum per order (or pay the difference as a service charge).

"Note: To meet the $100 line minimum the minimum order qty for this part is 295."
"Note: Orders under $250 can be completed if you agree to accept a service charge."

_________________
In 1988 my 65C02 got six new registers and 44 new full-speed instructions!
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 5:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:28 pm
Posts: 10805
Location: England
A group-buy could make that workable - if 10 people want something, it could be approx $10 each, double that for shipping, and that's a good price for something you can't get anywhere else - even if you end up with lots of parts when you only needed two or three!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 5:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: Midwestern USA
Dr Jefyll wrote:
DerTrueForce wrote:
Many thanks to Dr Jefyll for bringing up Rochester Electronics, here.
You're welcome! But I'm just as surprised as you are. (I only searched a few parts, but I found stuff I thought I'd never see again.)

BigDumbDinosaur wrote:
Just to be unambiguous, Rochester has a 100 dollar minimum per order, not per item.
Huh? Are we looking at the same site?? What I get is 100 dollar minimum per line (ie, quantity of a single item), and a 250 dollar minimum per order (or pay the difference as a service charge).

"Note: To meet the $100 line minimum the minimum order qty for this part is 295."
"Note: Orders under $250 can be completed if you agree to accept a service charge."

Oops! :oops: You are right! I apparently can't see that print due to color, but my wife, who happened to be looking over my shoulder as I was reading your post, could see it. Good thing I have her around. :lol:

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 5:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:50 pm
Posts: 3354
Location: Ontario, Canada
Hullo, Mrs Dinosaur! Nice to have you with us! :)

_________________
In 1988 my 65C02 got six new registers and 44 new full-speed instructions!
https://laughtonelectronics.com/Arcana/ ... mmary.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: Midwestern USA
Dr Jefyll wrote:
Hullo, Mrs Dinosaur! Nice to have you with us! :)

:D :) :lol: :wink:

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 7:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 9:02 pm
Posts: 1687
Location: Sacramento, CA
Step 1 of converting the 65SPI from a Xilinx 9572 to Atmel 1504 is finally done. I have a successfully compiled JED file. I had to remove a few features to get it to fit.

Step 2 will be trying to optimize the code to fit a few features back into the design, if possible.

Step 3 will be to actually test a ATF1504 on my SBC-4 using the CF adapter and the ENC28J60 Ethernet module.

Stay tuned. My progress will be slow, but I'll do my best to keep it moving.

Daryl

_________________
Please visit my website -> https://sbc.rictor.org/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: Midwestern USA
8BIT wrote:
Step 1 of converting the 65SPI from a Xilinx 9572 to Atmel 1504 is finally done. I have a successfully compiled JED file. I had to remove a few features to get it to fit.

Was this due to insufficient logic resources, insufficient pins, or both?

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sat Dec 01, 2018 9:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 9:02 pm
Posts: 1687
Location: Sacramento, CA
Really not sure... it would not provide a fit report for some reason and the error reports I could find talked a bout conflicts with clocks. I suspected the latches I had were the problem so I eliminated the clock divider and associated latches. I had also added some intermediate logic to help simplify some of the state machine logic. The current resource usage is:

Code:
Logic Array Block   Logic Cells   I/O Pins   Foldbacks   TotalPT      FanIN   Cascades
A: LC1   - LC16      10/16(62%)   8/16(50%)   0/16(0%)   34/80(42%)   (27)   0
B: LC17   - LC32      16/16(100%)   8/16(50%)   1/16(6%)   43/80(53%)   (27)   0
C: LC33   - LC48      15/16(93%)   6/16(37%)   1/16(6%)   40/80(50%)   (27)   0
D: LC49   - LC64      12/16(75%)   5/16(31%)   0/16(0%)   27/80(33%)   (27)   0

Total dedicated input used:   1/4    (25%)
Total I/O pins used      27/32    (84%)
Total Logic cells used       53/64    (82%)
Total Flip-Flop used       37/64    (57%)
Total Foldback logic used    2/64    (3%)
Total Nodes+FB/MCells       55/64    (85%)
Total cascade used       0
Total input pins       9
Total output pins       19
Total Pts          144


I have enough pins but the logic cells are nearly maxed so that may have been one problem.

The current setup has all features except the SPI clock divider. There are 2 clock choices: use PHI2 or an external shift clock. 95% of the time I ran the SPI clock direct from PHI2 on both SBC-3 and SBC-4, so I'm not too worried about losing that option. I really need to go back now and verify all the other logic translated correctly and that the state machine functions are still correct.

Daryl

_________________
Please visit my website -> https://sbc.rictor.org/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:58 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 9:46 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: Midwestern USA
8BIT wrote:
Really not sure... it would not provide a fit report for some reason and the error reports I could find talked a bout conflicts with clocks. I suspected the latches I had were the problem so I eliminated the clock divider and associated latches. I had also added some intermediate logic to help simplify some of the state machine logic. The current resource usage is:

Code:
Logic Array Block   Logic Cells   I/O Pins   Foldbacks   TotalPT      FanIN   Cascades
A: LC1   - LC16      10/16(62%)   8/16(50%)   0/16(0%)   34/80(42%)   (27)   0
B: LC17   - LC32      16/16(100%)   8/16(50%)   1/16(6%)   43/80(53%)   (27)   0
C: LC33   - LC48      15/16(93%)   6/16(37%)   1/16(6%)   40/80(50%)   (27)   0
D: LC49   - LC64      12/16(75%)   5/16(31%)   0/16(0%)   27/80(33%)   (27)   0

Total dedicated input used:   1/4    (25%)
Total I/O pins used      27/32    (84%)
Total Logic cells used       53/64    (82%)
Total Flip-Flop used       37/64    (57%)
Total Foldback logic used    2/64    (3%)
Total Nodes+FB/MCells       55/64    (85%)
Total cascade used       0
Total input pins       9
Total output pins       19
Total Pts          144


I have enough pins but the logic cells are nearly maxed so that may have been one problem.

The current setup has all features except the SPI clock divider. There are 2 clock choices: use PHI2 or an external shift clock. 95% of the time I ran the SPI clock direct from PHI2 on both SBC-3 and SBC-4, so I'm not too worried about losing that option. I really need to go back now and verify all the other logic translated correctly and that the state machine functions are still correct.

Daryl

Are you letting the fitter decide where to place pins?

_________________
x86?  We ain't got no x86.  We don't NEED no stinking x86!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 65SPI
PostPosted: Sun Dec 02, 2018 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:56 pm
Posts: 360
In my experience, it mainly refuses to spit out a fit report if you have a semantic (not syntactic) error in the CUPL code. E.g. you make reference to a NODE's output, without defining the necessary inputs (such as .d & .ck) for it to know what kind of NODE it is.

_________________
Want to design a PCB for your project? I strongly recommend KiCad. Its free, its multiplatform, and its easy to learn!
Also, I maintain KiCad libraries of Retro Computing and Arduino components you might find useful.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 106 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: