Hi,
The Bus Pirate is very good but i have idea to use a faster PIC(PIC32 with DMA and lot of ram/flash/speed...) for next version of Bus Pirate V4 ?
The idea will be to use PIC32MX695F512H full spec here:http://www.microchip.com/wwwproducts/Devices.aspx?dDocName=en545654
Max Frequency is 80Mhz (and can be overclocked to more than 100Mhz) and DMA feature is really interesting to obtain for example very fast input capture (for logic analyzer) using DMA channel and other funny stuff, in addition to USB and Ethernet10/100Mb for very fast upload/download (to SUMP or PC) stuff and all using only DMA.
The price PIC32MX695F512H is only about to 7euros/10US$ and we could have a very good Bus Pirate for maybe 50US$.
Best Regards
Hi Titan - The 32 chips are really interesting. Unfortunately, they lack PPS (peripheral pin select), the key feature that lets us move all the different hardware peripherals to the same 5 output pins.
[quote author="ian"]
Hi Titan - The 32 chips are really interesting. Unfortunately, they lack PPS (peripheral pin select), the key feature that lets us move all the different hardware peripherals to the same 5 output pins.
[/quote]
I think PPS feature can be done by software abstraction layer (define or function) easily.
My idea about a new Bus Pirate HW is not really to keep compatibility with old one PIC24 which are very far to PIC32 in power/functionality (frequency, memory, IO, Ethernet/USB speed ...).
PS: I have forgotten to introduce me, i'm software engineer in embedded critical software (from low level to OS stuff) since lot of years.
I'm ready to help (design/code and tests) such project to have very optimized code using fast mechanism like DMA/Interrupt stuff on advanced µC like PIC32.
Best Regards
[quote author="TitanMKD"]I think PPS feature can be done by software abstraction layer (define or function) easily.[/quote]If you move a hardware feature to software abstraction, then you lose the advantage of the faster processor. There are many hardware interfaces which simply cannot be handled by software interrupts because the hardware clock rate is too high.
One suggestion I'd make, and it's rather minor, would be to add a three pin header to the board to make using the pull-ups easier.
1) 5V
2) Vpullup
3) 3.3V
That allows me to address 99% of my pullup requirements with (or without) a single jumper.
(I'm working with SOT-23 eeproms, and the extra power conenctor is a real PITA.)
Amazing product!
In the new v4 buspirate we added two fets to select 3v3, 5v or Vpu (on the header) to be connected to Vpu.
Take a look at the v4 hardware topic: http://dangerousprototypes.com/forum/in ... opic=727.0 (http://dangerousprototypes.com/forum/index.php?topic=727.0) We can't garantee this is the final v4 design, but stuff like this will be in.