TAS3251: Using PurePath console with embedded design without EVM

Hi Tamas,

We do not have a small board to communicate from PPC3 to end devices. PPC3 is designed to work with the EVMs so that customers can evaluate the parts and generate the I2C code needed for their own designs, not as a way to universally communicate to devices in end systems. You can use PPC3 to generate the I2C needed and use whatever I2C generator you want to send these commands to devices.

Regards,

Ramsey

Hi Ramsey, thank you for your answer!

I am aware that PPC3 is designed to work with EVMs. The problem is that is only and excusively works with EVMs. What I suggested is that it would be nice if we could use it in situ for final fine tuning with the actual hardware. In one of the above linked threads someone suggested to create an API for PPC3, in another one someone else was asking for the firmware of the XMOS device. Both would be nice to have to be honest, with the firmware we could implement a factory test mode for our products on the actual final application processor instead of using the XMOS chip. That would be pretty handy. Same goes for the api for example for iot audio solutions. 

I understand that I can use PPC3 to generate the register map and use it that way and that is what we were using but this method slows down the development/tuning process quite significantly. 

I don't even get it why the XMOS firmware is closed in the first place. It's in ti's best interest to give their customers all possible tools to use their chips in their designs. PPC3 is a very nice tool to have but this limitation just makes no sense to me. Give us the freedom so that we can use the best tools to use your chips please. 

Another solution would be to release the USB protocol between purepath and the XMOS device. 

ANY solution would be much appreciated that would enable us with our final product to go "online" with PPC3.

Thank you!

Hi Tamas,

The best solution would be to use an EVM to generate or jumper over the I2C. PPC3 and the firmware is IP driven so we cannot have it open to the public. Fine tuning should be done with the EVM as the evaluation of the device is being done. Once a customer has their own boards for development, any further adjustments to the system should be done in their own SoC using PPC3 to aid if necessary.

What sort of fine tuning are you trying to do that needs PPC3 on an end system?

Regards,

Ramsey

Ramsey Foote said:

any further adjustments to the system should be done in their own SoC using PPC3 to aid if necessary

This is exactly what I'd like to achieve! Can you please tell me how that could be done?

Ramsey Foote said:

What sort of fine tuning are you trying to do that needs PPC3 on an end system?

An end system can be wastly different in pcb layout, power stages and pretty much everything else. An EVM is just an EVM, different power rails, different chip configuration in certain cases and so on. Why even do I need to explain this to a ti expert?

Ramsey Foote said:

PPC3 and the firmware is IP driven

This just makes no sense. I mean, yes it is ip driven obviously because its ti's stuff but what PPC3 does is basycally documented in the datasheet and other donwloadable reading resources in a user friendly gui. Same goes for the fimrware, a glorified usb audio and usb i2c device that is so basic nowadays that it just makes no sense to close source it. Just tell us how it works and we will implement it in our own firmware as a factory calibration option. 

Please consider my suggestions and also consider the prices of all ti's EVM modules because that pricing scheme is getting outdated with todays competitors, especially asian ones. 

Regards,

Tamas

Hi Ramsey Foote :

Is it possible to share the USB communication data format?

So that we can know how the EVM communicate with PPC3?

Ramsey Foote said:

This is not something we readily give out and is part of the XMOS firmware

Hi Ramsey!

Why this is so? What is the reasoning behind such a thing? Close sourcing a development tool for your chips you are trying to sell doesn't seem to make much sense to me. USB protocols can be reverse engineered with todays tools in a breeze so why not just make our life easyer?  Or if its just so that you can sell the overpriced EVMs? No, just build that into the chips price and make EVMs accessible to anyone for very cheap and open source like a ton of other manufacturers do it. 

Regards, 

Tamas