ATmega32U4 with timing sensitive application and USB

Log in or register to post comments
Go To Last Post
9 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
ragge
ragge's picture
Level: New Member
Joined: Fri. Jan 14, 2022
Posts: 4 View posts
#1
Posted by ragge: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 06:01 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

 

Hi all,

 

I am looking into using an ATmega32U4 for converting a timing sensitive protocol to USB, essentially being a slave to an old traditional bidirectional parallell bus with RD and WR strobes.

I have used 32U4s with Arduino, but in this case I believe I should build the firmware from C for better control (I don't know enough about what the Arduino stuff does that could possibly upset the timing), and I have not done that before. I would be really helped by some advice from this community.
 

It needs to respond within a microsecond or so to changes in RD and WR strobe lines during transactions on the parallell bus, for example to tristate the outputs when RD goes inactive, and the transactions can last for 10-20 ms or so.

One idea is to use Pin Change Interrupts with the strobes, and do bit banging in those.
But for this to work with microsecond latency, it must respond to the interrupts within a few (16) instructions, so there can be no other interrupts enabled, at least not any with a handler that doesn't immediately enable interrupts again.

Will the USB interface work without interrupts enabled?
Would it be better to use LUFA or the Atmel USB library for this?
 

Would I be better off with another controller?

 

Thanks a lot for all input,
/ragge
 

Tags:

AVR Microcontrollers, megaAVR and tinyAVR, Xmega, PMIC, Infineon Technologies, PIC18F25K50
Last Edited: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 09:20 PM
Top
ki0bk
ki0bk's picture
Level: 10k+ Postman
Joined: Mon. Sep 8, 2014
Posts: 10611 View posts
Location: Over the rainbow
Posted by ki0bk: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 07:59 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Welcome to AVRFreaks!

 

 I have no experience with the USB, so can't help there, but I would use the INTn pins rather then the PCINTn pins as the INTn pins have priority and each has its own ISR(), with the PCINT's you have to figure out which pins caused the interrupt which will take additional time.   Also IIRC with the INTn pins you can choose which edge of the pin changes will cause the interrupt, where the PCINT's will cause an interrupt in either edge direction, again more to sort out in s/w.....

 

 

Jim

 

FF = PI > S.E.T

 

Top
N.Winterbottom
N.Winterbottom's picture
Level: Raving Lunatic
Joined: Tue. Oct 1, 2002
Posts: 2823 View posts
Location: Redbourn, Herts, UK
Posted by N.Winterbottom: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 09:05 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

For really strict ISR latency requirements you should choose a micro with a fully prioritised interrupt controller. This means either the 16-bit PIC24 series or 32-bit SAM or PIC32 device from Microchip.

 

I dare say STM32 would also suffice for your requirements, but you shouldn't really ask about that on a Microchip forum.

 

Top
ragge
ragge's picture
Level: New Member
Joined: Fri. Jan 14, 2022
Posts: 4 View posts
Posted by ragge: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 09:19 PM (Reply to #2)
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

 

Hi Jim,

 

Thanks, and thanks for your thoughts!

 

I​​​​n this case I thought it was a feature to have interrupts on both edges, at least for /RD:

Falling edge -> Output data on pins, and set pins as output/driving

Rising edge -> Set pins as as input/tristate

 

For /WR, one would read input ("latch") when it goes low, and there is no use for the rising edge, so I agree that it would probably be better as an INTn.
 

Thanks for the suggestion!

 

Best,

/ragge

 

Top
gchapman
gchapman's picture
Level: 10k+ Postman
Joined: Tue. Jan 9, 2007
Posts: 16466 View posts
Location: Clay County, Texas, u.S.A.
Posted by gchapman: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 09:38 PM (Reply to #3)
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

AVR1305: XMEGA Interrupts and the Programmable Multi-level Interrupt Controller

PIC18(L)F2X45K50 Data Sheet (USB PIC, page 111)

 

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

Top
ragge
ragge's picture
Level: New Member
Joined: Fri. Jan 14, 2022
Posts: 4 View posts
Posted by ragge: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 09:49 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

N.Winterbottom wrote:

For really strict ISR latency requirements you should choose a micro with a fully prioritised interrupt controller. This means either the 16-bit PIC24 series or 32-bit SAM or PIC32 device from Microchip.


 

Thanks for the suggestions! I'll look into those.
(I see now that the SAM D5x/E5x has a "Parallel Capture Controller" (PCC), which could possibly be used for the WR operations (except the strobe seems to be inverted), even with DMA it seems.)

 

N.Winterbottom wrote:

I dare say STM32 would also suffice for your requirements, but you shouldn't really ask about that on a Microchip forum.

 

Of course, I have now rephrased that, thanks!

Best,

/ragge

 

Top
ragge
ragge's picture
Level: New Member
Joined: Fri. Jan 14, 2022
Posts: 4 View posts
Posted by ragge: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 10:25 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 1

gchapman wrote:

AVR1305: XMEGA Interrupts and the Programmable Multi-level Interrupt Controller

PIC18(L)F2X45K50 Data Sheet (USB PIC, page 111)

Yes, interrupt priorities may be the way to go. Thanks!

 

Best,

/ragge

 

Top
Who-me
Who-me's picture
Level: Raving Lunatic
Joined: Sun. Mar 25, 2007
Posts: 2625 View posts
Posted by Who-me: Fri. Jan 14, 2022 - 10:54 PM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

ragge wrote:

It needs to respond within a microsecond or so to changes in RD and WR strobe lines during transactions on the parallell bus, for example to tristate the outputs when RD goes inactive, and the transactions can last for 10-20 ms or so.

...

Would I be better off with another controller?

 

With timing that tight, you could consider two controllers ?

Use one rather like a CPLD to manage the very tight timing, and buffer things, and deliver serial data to the USB controller.

 

What size packets and what burst speeds do you need, and what handshake system does the existing interface use  ?

 

There are also FTDI parts that have parallel bus interfaces, one of those, or one + CPLD might manage higher data rates than bit-banged sw.

 

Top
gchapman
gchapman's picture
Level: 10k+ Postman
Joined: Tue. Jan 9, 2007
Posts: 16466 View posts
Location: Clay County, Texas, u.S.A.
Posted by gchapman: Sat. Jan 15, 2022 - 12:24 AM (Reply to #8)
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Who-me wrote:
There are also FTDI parts that have parallel bus interfaces,
likewise Cypress GPIFTM (common use case is inexpensive logic analyzers)

EZ-USB™ FX2LP - Infineon Technologies

EZ-USB™ FX3 SuperSpeed USB 3.0 peripheral controller - Infineon Technologies

 

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

Top