This thread has been locked.
If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.
LaunchPad hardware revision to expand device support? We need your opinions - the future of LaunchPad is in your hands!
Hello MSP430 e2e-ers!
We would like to call on the online community to help us determine
the future of the MSP430 Value Line LaunchPad development kit. The Value
Line microcontroller family (MSP430G2xx) is growing and will soon feature integrated hardware UART in future devices.
With this new feature, we may update LaunchPad so that it can
directly interface with these devices. Please, review the proposals
below, and let us know your opinion via the online poll. The poll will
be open until Jan 20, 2011.
If you have any other ideas or comments, let us know by responding to this post!
As always, thanks for supporting MSP430! LaunchPad was built specifically with our online community in mind, so we're excited at the opportunity to hear everyone's thoughts!
Existing LaunchPad (MSP-EXP430G2) pin assignments are OK for today's devices with Timer UART
However, we want LaunchPad to continue to support the new wave of
Value Line devices (MSP430G2xx3) with HW UART (notice the RX and TX
lines are flipped on these new devices)
The new MSP430G2xx3 devices can continue to use LaunchPad if the
Timer UART is used, but HW UART will not be compatible due to the
What are the options?
Proposal 1: Rev
LaunchPad to include 2 more pins, to allow users to flip ports P1.1 and
P1.2 depending on the position of a jumper. Both positions below support
Timer UART (pin swap can be reflected in SW) and HW UART with position
Jumpers @ Position 1 will allow existing code to run without modification on this new LaunchPad
Jumpers @ Position 2 will allow designs with HW UART to run on this new LaunchPad as well
Proposal 2: Similar
in concept to Proposal 1, except we do not change the LaunchPad layout -
we simply provide prototyping wires to allow developers to flip the
pins when HW UART is needed. Both positions below support Timer UART
(pin swap can be reflected in SW) and HW UART with position 2.
Proposal 3: Rev LaunchPad by re-routing the existing traces to permanently flip P1.1 and P1.2
Proposal 3 allows HW UART and Timer UART, however existing code
generated on the current LaunchPad design will have to be modified to
support the flipped pins.
Proposal 1 and 2 can support existing code unmodified when the jumper/wire is in position 1.
Proposal 2 is fine. Why complicate with different launchpad layouts/revisions.
We are glad that we were able to resolve this issue, and will now proceed to close this thread.
If you have further questions related to this thread, you may click "Ask a related question" below. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.
Go for Proposal 1! Sounds perfectly reasonable.
In reply to Ian Daniher:
I went for proposal 1 also. Personally I would also be okay with 2, but 3 sounds like starting from ground zero all over again. Since I know that all I have to do is "flip pins" to use new chip functionality on the old board, I am totally good as is. ;)
Btw @ Ian, how is your I2C servo going?? I tried your website about a month ago, but I.E. just asks me if I want to download a file?? ... wierd huh? My drv8811 stepper is coming along, but I will not have a lot of time to work on it because my new semester starts 1/3/11. I just got my new textbooks.
Honestly, I think Proposal 3 is the best. The LaunchPad hasn't been out that long, so there's not a very large quantity of legacy code to have to rely on. Why keep the extra baggage? I say we break with the old connection and do it right. Any code that is going to be reused, it's simply a pin swap; it shouldn't be too difficult of a change.
I like proposal 1 for ease of use. If the board is going to be rerouted for other reasons, by all means include the extra jumper. On my existing Launchpads, I would most likely homebrew a solution similar to proposal 2. By all means, do not do proposal 3.
In reply to paradug:
Proposal 2 is the right one! That's what every current LaunchPad user will have to do when using the new parts on his board. Just include 2 jump wires in the LaunchPad boxes and you're done!
Happy New Year to all!aBUGSworstnightmare
proposal 2 is best.
than proposal 1.
Proposal 2 is best... As it is we are facing delievery issue with this tool so just including wire jumpers make sense.
In reply to Vikas Chola:
how do i vote??
All content and materials on this site are provided "as is". TI and its respective suppliers and providers of content make no representations about the suitability of these materials for any purpose and disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to these materials, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement of any third party intellectual property right. TI and its respective suppliers and providers of content make no representations about the suitability of these materials for any purpose and disclaim all warranties and conditions with respect to these materials. No license, either express or implied, by estoppel or otherwise, is granted by TI. Use of the information on this site may require a license from a third party, or a license from TI.
TI is a global semiconductor design and manufacturing company. Innovate with 100,000+ analog ICs andembedded processors, along with software, tools and the industry’s largest sales/support staff.