Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
Author Topic: PIC32 Arduino Variant?  (Read 6069 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
0
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 1
Posts: 185
www.rocketscream.com
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Not too sure whether this is slow poke.

http://www.digilentinc.com/Products/Catalog.cfm?NavPath=2,892&Cat=18

They said modified version of Arduino IDE available on 21/05.
Slightly cheaper.
Logged

Newcastle, UK
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I saw their announcement earlier in the week. If you're into PIC's then it looks a good board to have. Not sure about the software they mentioned as it isn't released until 21st May
Logged

Phoenix, Arizona USA
Offline Offline
Faraday Member
**
Karma: 40
Posts: 5592
Where's the beer?
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I'll believe it if the software released includes all the source code, and runs on 64-bit Linux - I'm not holding my breath (although I suppose it is possible - based on some quick research I just did, there seems to be some form of "gcc" support, and something about a small rtos based on linux that can run on some device in the PIC32 family - just have to wait-n-see, I guess).
Logged

I will not respond to Arduino help PM's from random forum users; if you have such a question, start a new topic thread.

Portugal
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 6
Posts: 962
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

The compiler is 100% gcc, so it can be recompiled to wathever you want, in fact it is the mips-gcc variation with some Microchip headers.
Logged

Newcastle, UK
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 0
Posts: 239
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

The compiler is 100% gcc, so it can be recompiled to wathever you want, in fact it is the mips-gcc variation with some Microchip headers.
I'm pretty sure the PIC32 is based on a MIPS architecture.
Logged

Portugal
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 6
Posts: 962
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Its the mips M4k cpu, in the variation with 1 shadow bank of registers.
Logged

Central MN, USA
Offline Offline
Tesla Member
***
Karma: 74
Posts: 7243
Phi_prompt, phi_interfaces, phi-2 shields, phi-panels
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I'm interested in this for more speed and memory, maybe a gaming system or video processing node with a nice touch screen display and audio support shield:

http://www.digilentinc.com/Products/Detail.cfm?NavPath=2,892,893&Prod=CHIPKIT-UNO32

Someone needs to be the guinea pig for this.
Logged


0
Offline Offline
Faraday Member
**
Karma: 16
Posts: 2855
ruggedcircuits.com
View Profile
WWW
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
Someone needs to be the guinea pig for this.

Microchip Direct shipped ours today smiley

Also see our "how compatible are the shield pins" analysis thread here:

http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php?topic=61826

--
The Gadget Shield: accelerometer, RGB LED, IR transmit/receive, speaker, microphone, light sensor, potentiometer, pushbuttons
Logged

Sofia, Bulgaria
Offline Offline
Newbie
*
Karma: 0
Posts: 13
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Were you guys able to download a 64-bit version of the "modified" Arduino IDE for this board?
On the vendor site I only saw that there's only a 32 bit version...


Cheers,
Boyan
Logged

SF Bay Area (USA)
Offline Offline
Tesla Member
***
Karma: 135
Posts: 6782
Strongly opinionated, but not official!
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Well, I've done this for Arduino and Arduino Mega, so I might as well continue.   Here (linked to) is an "annotated" picture of one of the Uno32 boards, with notes describing most of the significant features (and some of the insignificant features as well.)

Logged

SF Bay Area
Offline Offline
Full Member
***
Karma: 1
Posts: 182
Arduino rocks
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

This is a pretty impressive board if they were able to duplicate the libraries.

Has anyone tried using these, and do they "just work" as a drop-in substitute?

It seems odd that maple never seemed to get it done, and this comes out fully complete.

I was disappointed to see that these have 10-bit ADCs, but for the price you can't complain.

This seems like a great option for sound or video processing.
Logged

Portugal
Offline Offline
God Member
*****
Karma: 6
Posts: 962
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Yes, the 10 bits ADC's are a bit limiting, but then you can sample at 1Msps!
Logged

SF Bay Area (USA)
Offline Offline
Tesla Member
***
Karma: 135
Posts: 6782
Strongly opinionated, but not official!
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
Has anyone tried using these, and do they "just work" as a drop-in substitute?
they run the simple sketches.  I don't really have anything complicated to try out.  The compatibility is pretty much all at the Arduino library level (though they're working on it), so if you have code that does direct port manipulation, or even one that is dependent on some of the more obscure features of avr-libc, it's going to require some additional work.

Quote
It seems odd that maple never seemed to get it done, and this comes out fully complete.
I think chipKit is somewhat aided by some microchip-owned slightly-closed-source libraries that they allowed to be used in an otherwise open-source project (low level initialization for the on-chip peripherals, for example.)  IIRC, Maple was attempting to avoid any not-completely-open-source code and was writing everything from scratch.  This is pretty tough on complex 32-bit cpus, since much of the documentation assumes that you'll be using the vendor-provided code, and you can't/shouldn't even look at that code to clarify your understanding of the peripherals if the documentation turns out to be "weak."  (The license terms of this SW tend to be pretty OK; "Here's the full source, but you can only use it on OUR cpus" and such.  More of a problem at deep philosophical and legal levels than in practice.  The current state of the ChipKit SW seems like a reasonable compromise to me...)
Also, I think chipKit was better funded; people were able to work on it full-time.
Logged

Offline Offline
Newbie
*
Karma: 0
Posts: 6
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

I think chipKit is somewhat aided by some microchip-owned slightly-closed-source libraries that they allowed to be used in an otherwise open-source project (low level initialization for the on-chip peripherals, for example.)  ... Also, I think chipKit was better funded; people were able to work on it full-time.
All of the Microsoft libraries, including low level initialization, are well documented and source is freely available. I think Digilent's performance compared to Maple had more to do with your second thought, that Digilent has full time people - probably a whole team - that are paid to do this kind of work full time.

My beef with Microchip is not about the libraries, rather it is the cost of their toolchain. Their compliers are based on gcc and thus source should be available under GPL, but good luck finding something you can actually compile. So you either get the very hobbled free versions (on the order of 2.5x code size), or you pay over $1000 EACH for compilers - one for the 8 bit machines, a different one for PIC24/dsPIC33 and yet another for PIC32. This is a classic case of Microchip now knowing what business they are in. They sell chips, they should give the compilers away. Even Renesas has finally embraced a gcc toolchain, and ARM has had one for years.

This is why I finally jumped ship to the ARM Cortex. The M0 is faster than the PIC 18 at the same price, and the M4 just blows the PIC32 away.
Logged

SF Bay Area (USA)
Offline Offline
Tesla Member
***
Karma: 135
Posts: 6782
Strongly opinionated, but not official!
View Profile
 Bigger Bigger  Smaller Smaller  Reset Reset

Quote
and source is freely available.
But they have (had) somewhat obnoxious licensing terms.  Not awful, perhaps not technically any worse than GPL, but not the sort of thing that the community at large was very happy with.  (IIRC, the sticky point was not being able to distributed modified (or any) versions of the libraries.  So to ship source, you had to have instructions like "download my code from xxx.  Then download the microchip code from them, and apply this patch...")

Quote
My beef with Microchip is ... the cost of their toolchain.
I believe that only the 8-bit compiler is "hobbled" to the extent you describe.  And it's not based on gcc at all.
The PIC24 and PIC32 compilers based on gcc will produce pretty good code using compiled-from-source tools (minus license issues with libraries and include files.)  (Only some link-time optimizations are "proprietary")

In any case, the ChipKit tools are based on an open source version of the gcc compiler.

Now, a couple of things have happened since this thread was started.

1) Microchip has gotten looser with some of their licenses.  Notably, the processor definition include files have switched from the original license to a bsd-style open source license.

2) ChipKit itself switched from having some dependencies on microchip-licensed libraries, to using "newlib"; a fully open-source set of C libraries.  (It may be that the easiest way to install an open source Pic32 toolchain now is to extract it from ChipKit, which is an interesting state of affairs.)

See http://chipkit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1528
Logged

Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
Jump to: