| ??? 02/13/13 10:41 Read: times |
#189353 - Commonly Done Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Jos� A. Ruiz said:
....For example, instead of running several concurrent, loosely coupled state machines on a single CPU, you would have each state machine run in a separate CPU as an almost trivially simple task.
So the idea looks promising in principle. But are there any potential pitfalls or caveats a first-timer should look out for? is this really as good an idea in practice as it sounds? Am I going to regret it? Sure, that is how your PC and most cars are designed. A small Micro cost less than a Cable and connector,so they are often used distributed to simplify systems. Jos� A. Ruiz said:
For example, as has been mentioned in other posts, some of the things that can get messy are OCD and IAP; looks like I'll have to chain all the CPUs on the same JTAG link and make sure the debugging/programming software supports that scheme, or provide a separate connector for each MCU. Full JTAG tends to not come on the smallest uC, and as you said, the code tends to be simple, so that means you usually can connect and debug one at a time. Many little uC have IAP, so you can use a bootloader scheme if you need to change all fireware in-situ. Another approach is to place SMD pads,for ribbon cable soldering, or spring-probe connect, and use fixture programming. -jg |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Multi-CPU designs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Commonly Done | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Fun with network protocols | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| and also a twisted ring network | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Please explain a bit more | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| more details | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I'd use I²C | 01/01/70 00:00 |