Ron K. Jeffries wrote: > On a more serious note, curious about choice of SiLabs C8051F3xx. > Was it a) better or b) cheaper or c) you just love writing 8051 assembler. > ;)
I've used the SiLabs chips before - the F326, a smaller brother of the F320, for the first version of atusb, and the F320 for "cntr" (1). SDCC can generate 8051 code, so development isn't as evil as it may seem at a first glance. What's nice about the SiLabs chips is that - unlike the Atmels (2) - they can do USB without a crystal or resonator. The SiLabs chips also have 5 V tolerant I/Os, which will be very handy in this project. Last but not least, this gives me an excuse to merge the USB stack I made for these chips into the more advanced version I made for the Atmel chips. (1) http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/ben-wpan/source/tree/master/cntr/ This is a ben-wpan sub-project that produced an arbitrary-precision frequency counter, for measuring the accuracy of the Ben/atben/atusb crystals. Its functionality has since been absorbed into the atrf-xtal utility: http://projects.qi-hardware.com/index.php/p/ben-wpan/source/tree/master/tools/atrf-xtal/atusb.c atrf-xtal also does much better math than the original software for "cntr": http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/pipermail/discussion/2011-June/008094.html (2) Not counting V-USB, which can do low-speed without crystal on some chips, but the choice is quite limited. - Werner _______________________________________________ Qi Hardware Discussion List Mail to list (members only): [email protected] Subscribe or Unsubscribe: http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/mailman/listinfo/discussion
