Atmel Studio 6 BETA Released!

Go To Last Post
71 posts / 0 new

Pages

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

Quote:
better yet Atmel could just hire an External Professional software team to develop this software !

And do you think that continuous insulting could bring them to hear more to AVRfreaks forum members?

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

Quote:
The release notes were accidentally omitted by the website team, but they are uploaded now. Direct link:

Thanks Dean,

can you also give some release info about the new ASF version 3.01 that is included in AS6?

Are there infos about structure changes? With 5.1 the ending for project files was ".avrgccproj" now it is ".cproj". Some docs about what project files for which Studio version are important, and what files are rebuilt from the Studio would be helpful.

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

Quote:

And do you think that continuous insulting could bring them to hear more to AVRfreaks forum members?

Indeed - if it's not constructive, it's not helping and will only serve to make the tools developers stop listening. I think there are a lot of issues too, but please try to give serious suggestions for improvement.

Quote:

can you also give some release info about the new ASF version 3.01 that is included in AS6?

Again, I'm not sure what's up with our web site development team, but the standalone and release notes will be uploaded soon.

Quote:

Are there infos about structure changes? With 5.1 the ending for project files was ".avrgccproj" now it is ".cproj". Some docs about what project files for which Studio version are important, and what files are rebuilt from the Studio would be helpful.

Yes that would be helpful, but it's not something I know of - but I can find out for you. The extensions were made more generic so that we aren't tied to a specific architecture or compiler, but I'm not sure what versions produce what types of files.

- Dean :twisted:

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

Last Edited: Thu. Mar 1, 2012 - 10:01 AM
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

@bluegoo & @JS:
We do hear you. A modular deployment mechanism is definitely on the list. That list however is prioritized by the guys who steer the ship. Striking the balance between adding new features (like modular deployment, ASF and ARM) and catching up on old ones (like data breakpoints, trace and OSCCAL ) is hard. In light of the stock market, it can seem like they know what they are doing.
We do employ outsourcing, (I choose to see a recent comment as a suggestion to do this ;) ) but outsourcing this particular part is difficult. It's to tied in with development process. Rest assure however, that we're working on it (albeit slowly) ,and not least: that we want to fix it.

BR
-Ole

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

Quote:
A modular deployment mechanism is definitely on the list.
Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. :-)

You can let go of the arrow now, the ARM must be sore....

John Samperi

Ampertronics Pty. Ltd.

https://www.ampertronics.com.au

* Electronic Design * Custom Products * Contract Assembly

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

abcminiuser wrote:
The release notes were accidentally omitted by the website team, but they are uploaded now. Direct link:

http://www.atmel.com/Images/as6i...

- Dean :twisted:

Still no simulator support for more UC3 devices, bah :x

Hey Atmel could you please complete support for one family of devices before trying to add support for a completely new set?

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

Which ones are missing? The device support is partly a function of the AVR Toolchain support (to compile code), partly the Atmel Studio backend support (to simulate and program), and partly the ASF support (for drivers and examples). What devices are missing, and where?

- Dean :twisted:

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

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

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:

Are there infos about structure changes? With 5.1 the ending for project files was ".avrgccproj" now it is ".cproj". Some docs about what project files for which Studio version are important, and what files are rebuilt from the Studio would be helpful.

Yes that would be helpful, but it's not something I know of - but I can find out for you. The extensions were made more generic so that we aren't tied to a specific architecture or compiler, but I'm not sure what versions produce what types of files.

Please refer the attachment to see the list of the solution/project file extension for Studio.

Note: It is possible to open any of the solution/project with AVR Studio 5.0 file extension in AVR Studio 5.1/Atmel Studio 6.0 through the menu "File -> Open -> Project/Solution". In that case, Compatible projects for Studio 5.1/6.0 will be created and saved with new supported file extensions.

Attachment(s): 

Regards,
Deena

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

abcminiuser wrote:
Which ones are missing? The device support is partly a function of the AVR Toolchain support (to compile code), partly the Atmel Studio backend support (to simulate and program), and partly the ASF support (for drivers and examples). What devices are missing, and where?

- Dean :twisted:


Almost all UC3 devices have no support, just look at the release notes (pages 14 and 15). About 9 out of over 50 devices have simulator support. No devices from the UC3B or UC3C groups have simulator support.

This is really annoying since the debugger support for these devices is not very reliable (as of the latest version of 5.1).

Also, does this mean there will be no more updates for 5.1?

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

Quote:

Almost all UC3 devices have no support, just look at the release notes (pages 14 and 15). About 9 out of over 50 devices have simulator support. No devices from the UC3B or UC3C groups have simulator support.

Ah, simulator support. That's done by the tools backend team - I'm not sure why the other models aren't in the simulator yet, but it's probably in the backlog. I'll check on Monday on this if you like.

Quote:

This is really annoying since the debugger support for these devices is not very reliable (as of the latest version of 5.1).

Yes I've noticed a few glitches, but frankly simulating a UC3 is probably a bad idea anyway, due to the device complexity. Much easier to just add breakpoints (which seem to work reasonably well).

Quote:

Also, does this mean there will be no more updates for 5.1?

I can't say for certain on this, but I believe so - AS6 is basically AS5.1 with ARM support added, so future development is likely to continue on from there with the unified platform.

- Dean :twisted:

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

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

Quote:

I'm not sure why the other models aren't in the simulator yet

Do they have USB on board by any chance? There's not much evidence of simulation of any device with USB - I think most people would prefer the devices and accept that there is no USB simulation than no device at all.

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

Quote:

Do they have USB on board by any chance?

The UC3A and UC3B devices (which are currently supported in the simulator) have USB.

- Dean :twisted:

Make Atmel Studio better with my free extensions. Open source and feedback welcome!

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

abcminiuser wrote:

Ah, simulator support. That's done by the tools backend team - I'm not sure why the other models aren't in the simulator yet, but it's probably in the backlog. I'll check on Monday on this if you like.
I asked an atmel rep about it back in december and they said it was "in the works" or something equally vague. No kind of time table as far as I could tell.

Quote:

Yes I've noticed a few glitches, but frankly simulating a UC3 is probably a bad idea anyway, due to the device complexity. Much easier to just add breakpoints (which seem to work reasonably well).
Well what I specifically need is to know how long small sections of code take to execute during time-critical applications. Even when I can set up a debugger breakpoint properly (which is difficult because on higher optimization settings, you simply can't set breakpoints in most code), the measurement never seems to be accurate because the operation of the debugger adds on some time to the execution somehow... it's kind of hard to explain.

I miss the days when I used AS 4 with the mega devices and I could just step through code in the simulator and watch a nice stop watch/cycle counter tell me how much time was elapsing. I'd really like something like that for UC3 devices.

Quote:

I can't say for certain on this, but I believe so - AS6 is basically AS5.1 with ARM support added, so future development is likely to continue on from there with the unified platform.
Okay. At least the current 5.1 seems to be stable, so I'll be able to use it until 6.1 is.

abcminiuser wrote:
Quote:

Do they have USB on board by any chance?

The UC3A and UC3B devices (which are currently supported in the simulator) have USB.

Only for a few UC3A devices, and a couple UC3L ones. None for UC3B. And just curious, what does USB have to do with debugging? I presume it's pretty hard to simulate the USB, but I don't think most people would really require it. Even if it were simulated, you'd have to go to a lot of trouble to use it, by making very complex stimuli...

Thanks,
-Mike

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

How far along is QEMU-AVR32?

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

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

Atmel Store, Atmel Studio DVD
SKU: ATATMELSTUDIO
Atmel Studio 6 - The Integrated Development Environment
1USD (zero if a part of an order).
Thank you Atmel!

"Dare to be naïve." - Buckminster Fuller

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

Quote:

what does USB have to do with debugging

It's a block that would have to be simulated if you were implementing a complete simulation of the models that contain it. I was simply citing this as a possible reason why those simulation models do not exist.

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

The RTL code for UC3-devices are huge and complex. When we create simulator models for devices, we base them on the RTL code made by the IC developers, and have to do a lot of digging around in the RTL code. In other words creating UC3-models are a massive amount of work compared to the 8-bits. So, it all boils down to a matter of priority. If you take into consideration the amount of work needed for each device and customer demand for UC3 simulator support, it just hasn't reach the top of the pile yet.

At the moment we are actually making some changes to the tools we use for model creation which hopefully will make the job easier, but I can't promise you anything.

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

clawson wrote:

Do they have USB on board by any chance? There's not much evidence of simulation of any device with USB

The models in AStudio only contains synthesizeable RTL code. The USB consists of a lot of unsynthesizeable RTL code, which means that we have left it out. Since a lot of the 8-bit USB devices only have the USB to differentiate it from other devices it's below the UC3s in the pile.

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

je_ruud wrote:
The RTL code for UC3-devices are huge and complex. When we create simulator models for devices, we base them on the RTL code made by the IC developers, and have to do a lot of digging around in the RTL code. In other words creating UC3-models are a massive amount of work compared to the 8-bits. So, it all boils down to a matter of priority. If you take into consideration the amount of work needed for each device and customer demand for UC3 simulator support, it just hasn't reach the top of the pile yet.

I can imagine that creating working models is a huge amount of work. Especially if you have to simulate things like the Hmatrix bus, changing clock sources on the fly.... yeesh. But it's specifically because those models are hardware simulations that they're so useful.

I wouldn't be so insistent if the hardware debugging worked more robustly (I've been dealing with a parade of problems with missed breakpoints, mysterious exceptions, and other unexplainable bugs in the debugger in the last couple weeks). I just need one of them working... otherwise progress is slow and agonizing.

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

Quote:
exception has been thrown by the target of an invokation

I get this error when I program my UC3C-EK using JTAG and AVR Dragon, it is a popup right after

Erasing... OK
Programming Flash... OK

I didn't use to get this error in versions before AVR studio 6.

[/list][/list][/code]

Pages