ATtiny80-XNR / ATtiny840-XBT / ATtiny840-XNR

Go To Last Post
7 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I was looking to update devices that the autoprogrammer supports and came up with this list by comparing the ATDF files vs the XML ones I did years ago:

 

{"ATmega324PB",0x1e,0x95,0x17,0x8000,0x80,0x0400,0x04,0x41,1},        0x62,0x99,0xF7
{"ATmega328PB",0x1e,0x95,0x16,0x8000,0x80,0x0400,0x04,0x41,1},        0x62,0xD9,0xF7

{"ATtiny80",0x1e,0x93,0xC3,0x2000,0x40,0x0200,0x04,0x41,1},        0x62,0xD9,0xFF
{"ATtiny840",0x1e,0x93,0xC3,0x2000,0x40,0x0200,0x04,0x41,1},        0x62,0xD9,0xFF

{"ATtiny12",0x1e,0x90,0x05,0x0400,0x00,0x0040,0x02,0x04,0},        0x52
{"ATtiny15",0x1e,0x90,0x06,0x0400,0x00,0x0040,0x02,0x04,0},        0x14

 

The two that stick out that I can't find any info on is the tiny80 and tiny840.  I found these in the ATDF files, but I don't see any datasheets for them.  Does anyone know the story of these? 

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

ALSO - do tiny12 or tiny15 support page writing and/or have a page size?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

My first thought was that this was going to be another entry in the "brain dead" series (beyond t4, t5, t9, t10, t20, t40) so I thought there might be some discernible, incrementing pattern in the signature to show the t80 was "next in line". But the signatures of the others are:

t40: 1E 92 0E
t20: 1E 91 0F
t10: 1E 90 03
t9 : 1E 90 08
t5 : 1E 8F 09
t4 : 1E 8F 0A

and there's no obvious pattern I can spot in there. However another brain dead tiny seems likely.

 

What a t840 is though is anyone's guess.

 

What is a litte curious though is that assuming the first 3 bytes in each group are the signature bytes then t80 and t840 both seem to be 1E 93 C3. Perhaps that is just a "holding pattern" until the device exists and a real signature is issued?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

alank2 wrote:

ALSO - do tiny12 or tiny15 support page writing and/or have a page size?

Another good reference is:

 

http://svn.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/avrdude/trunk/avrdude/avrdude.conf.in?revision=1422&view=markup

 

While I don't pretend to understand the data fields in avrdude.conf I'm guessing that line 1728 is saying the tiny12 has 128 byte pages and maybe line 2036 is saying the same for tiny15 ?? But you would need to study the source to fully understand "blocksize" - maybe compare against SPM_PAGESIZE for some models you do know?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I'll bet you are right about the holding pattern - it is odd that they create a ATDF for them, but they don't exist.  I was hoping the XNR or XBT would be some sort of clue!

 

It looks like there are variables in that avrdude liked paged and page_size and I can see they are set for others, but not set in the tiny12/tiny15.  I'll bet they only support a subset of the ISP programming commands (no page commands) and can only be programmed word for word.  As I don't have a word for word mode in my autoprogrammer currently (just page programming), I'll drop them for now...

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

alank2 wrote:
The two that stick out that I can't find any info on is the tiny80 and tiny840.  I found these in the ATDF files, ...
tiny840 is in IAR EWAVR but couldn't locate tiny80; IAR supports AVR that aren't in Microchip's portfolio.

A guess is tiny80 and tiny840 are for a few or several Microchip customers of volume.

 

IAR Device Search - AVR ('Show more' at bottom a few times)

 

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 1

Sometimes devices change names from the time of planning til the time of public release. Once in a while things do slip through that should have been caught. It's very hard to undo things that have leaked out.

 

I don't know all the details of the story, but I do know that tiny80, tiny840 and tiny828 where all the same project. Only tiny828 is in production.