next topic »

[on:]

Hi, all,

Just wondered why the Arduino boards are all still using the (external) FT232 chip when Atmel do parts with embedded USB transcievers (e.g. AT90USB1287)?  

Are there any plans to migrate to or make an AT90 variant of the Arduino?

Cheers,

Graham.

[Reply #1 on:]

Hi, all,

You can even get demo boards with the USB parts in, like here:
http://www.atmel.com/dyn/products/tools_card.asp?tool_id=3879  

Cheers,

Graham.

[Reply #2 on:]

1) None of the AVRUSB chips is particularly backward compatible with the CPUs currently in use.
2) Cost of ATmega168 + FTDI chip is less than any of the USB chips with equal RAM (1K or more.)
3) The FTDI chip comes with well-tested drivers emulating a serial port on all three popular desktop operating systems, making it easy for random applications to communicate with.  Getting to that point with an native-USB AVR would be a lot of work (and/or expense) for someone.

[Reply #3 on:]

There are a few of us working on this.  The project is in its infancy right now.  Currently, there is code to allow sketches to run on the AT90USB162, but without any support for using the USB (yet).  If you're alpha/beta testing or getting involved, please contact me.

It is absolutely true that the USB portion is very different from using a UART and supporting it well will be a LOT of work.  I could go on about the details, but honestly at this early stage everything is still in flux.    But if you're interested in getting involved, we could certainly use help.  The rough plan is to add an "easy" API on top of Dean Camera's LUFA (MyUSB) library.  It's not clear yet how the host side and IDE will work and several different ideas are on the table.

Help is of course very welcome.  I would particularly like to hear from you if you're able to do Alpha (not even "alpha", pre-alpha, whatever) testing with good, reproducible bug reports.  That will be very helpful as the USB support is added.  Unlike the FTDI chip, there are a lot of ways the USB can work with and much testing will be needed.

Regarding the hardware cost, while the bigger chips are pretty spendy, the little chips that have admittedly only 1/2 the RAM of an Arduino are very affordable.

[Reply #4 on:]

Sounds very cool.  You should post about your progress and consider writing to the developers mailing list (http://mail.arduino.cc/mailman/listinfo/developers_arduino.cc)if you've got something that you think would make sense to incorporate into the standard Arduino boards.

[Reply #5 on:]

Do the smaller AVUSB devices have separate ram for USB buffers, or are you talking about half the ram of a mega8 MINUS the usually-substantial memory used by USB ?

[Reply #6 on:]

All the USB chips have separate memory to buffer sending and receiving data on the various endpoints.  The AT90USB162 chip has 176 bytes of this memory, which Atmel calls "DPRAM" (DP = dual port, because it can be accessed by both the processor and USB hardware), and it also has 512 bytes of regular RAM.

USB also includes flow control implemented at the hardware level (in all the Atmel USB chips), so it is not necessary (if done properly) to buffer incoming data in regular RAM.  For example, the regular serial port via FTDI has no flow control (CTS/RTS is not used), so a 128 byte receive buffer is allocated in memory to hold characters your PC might send before your sketch has a chance to read them, like if it's sitting inside a delay() for quite some time.  With USB, the data will be buffered inside the dedicated DPRAM and when that buffer is full, the USB hardware will automatically prevent your PC from transmitting more until your sketch finishes that long delay() and reads the data from the buffer.  (actually, in reality the hardware sends "nak" packets that make your PC retransmit the data, but the point is it's all done at the hardware level so you don't need to consume regular RAM for buffering like would be necessary with regular serial).

A small amount of RAM is needed to hold a few variables related to the USB configuration.  It's surprisingly small.

The USB chips do have a regular UART built in, and if you use that the regular serial buffer memory will be needed.

[Reply #7 on:]

thanks for the info.  Having the separate dpram makes having half the normal ram a lot less worrisome...

[Reply #8 on:]

This crazy idea is now in beta test....

http://www.pjrc.com/teensy/teensyduino.html

[Reply #9 on:]

Interesting device, it looks like the USB can be configured so it appears as mouse or keyboard ( and presumably as a mass storage device) , is that correct?

Although it does not have a timer2, the data sheet does say it has 5 PWM channels (3 using timer1)

Looks to be a nice addition to the arduino world.

[Reply #10 on:]

Good stuff.  Couple quick questions for my amusement:

1) Does TeensyDuino software have any way to interface with the AT90USBKey devices?  I grabbed two of those early on and haven't done anything with them since the Arduino's a little more permissive.

2) It says "serial:1", but just to confirm--would these allow basic TTL-style serial while simultaneously using the USB port (for say HID)?  (I'm thinking in the context of a serial-interface game controller mapped to a HID device from the USB port, which I'm doing with Arduino's serial port and the UsbJoystick library but might be cleaner with the AT90USBKey's proper USB interface and LUFA).

[Reply #11 on:]

Paul, I like the project, but you should publish all source files and schematics or be extremely upfront about your plans to not open source the teensyduino hardware and bootloader and any other exceptions.

I ran the install but did not see a bootloader created and have not seen a schematic anywhere.  Are you keeping your hardware and bootloader closed?  People need to know this as it is a key motivating factor when deciding to participate in a particular project or not.

[Reply #12 on:]

Yes, the hardware most definitely is able to act as a HID, Mass Storage or almost any type of USB device.  Currently, Teensyduino only adds files to Arduino for a serial type device.  I intend to add other types.  However, the Arduino IDE contains a lot of serial-only assumptions, so support non-serial device types on Arduino is going to take a lot of work.  I am working on that....

You most certainly can use the serial at the same time as the USB.  It's like having 2 serial ports.  Or a HID and serial, if you program the USB to act as HID.

Teensyduino only supports the Teensy.  If you have a usbkey board, Dean Camera's LUFA library, win-avr, and Atmel's FLIP tool are your best option.

Please understand that this project is very new and the website and supporting files are still under development, and Teensyduino (the software add-on for the Arduino IDE) is only in its very first beta test right now.  A full schematic will be added soon.  Many more examples are also planned.  It is a lot of work, as so many people have said dismissively regarding the possibility of using this chip with Arduino.  I'm working on a giant TO-DO list.

However, the bootloader is not open source.  If you are looking for a 100% pure open source project, including bootloader source code and CAD files under a share-alike license, Teensy is not for you.  It is most certainly NOT my intention to deceive anyone.  Building excellent web pages is an iterative process, and the teensyduino page has already been revised substantially based on feedback from many people.  Please if you have any constructive and specific suggestions, contact me directly at paul@pjrc.com  

All code that becomes part of your program is open source.  Everything I have added is under the MIT license, which is more permissive than the LGPL which Arduino uses.  Of course the additions to the Arduino IDE are open source under the GPL, and they are placed in a "src" directory when you run the Teensyduino installer.  The IDE changes have also been offered to the Arduino developer list.

About the PWM, while Atmel's datasheet says there are 5 PWM, and indeed there are inside the chip.  Unfortunately Atmel decided to put 2 of them on the same pin!  The web page says 4 because you can never actually use all 5.  I wouldn't want anyone to buy the board or plan their project around 5 PWM outputs and later discover you can only use 4.

[Reply #13 on:]

I personally wouldn't be interested if it is not Open Source no matter what the advantages are. The beauty of the Arduino is peopel can modify the hardware and code to their liking and there are lots of nice clone kits out there all tailored to your individual needs or you can make your own.

I'll stick with my Arduino thanks.

[Reply #14 on:]

To be honest, it just looks like a less comprehensive but cheaper alternative to the Arduino Nano..

http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardNano

I'm sure this will appeal to some people, but I personally only use Arduinos for interfacing with the outside world, not my USB port.. 38Kbps is plenty fast enough for this purpose IMHO.