AM2431: EtherCAT slave stack

To make the picture more confusing:

There exists a third description here: "https://software-dl.ti.com/mcu-plus-sdk/esd/AM243X/08_01_00_36/exports/docs/industrial_protocol_docs/am243x/ethercat_slave/index.html".

This is the Slave Version 1.04.01 with a licensing reference to Kunbus GmbH (correction to the previous posting., Not "koenig GmbH" but "kunbus GmbH".

A little clarification would be appreciated here.

rgds

Hello Nilabh Anand,

thank you for the confirmation. Can you please disclose where to find more detailed infromation about the both different solution (ETG / Kunbus)?

I found out that "kunbus GmbH" states that their stack is integrated in the processor and the license is included. Is that the "F" option in the table

10.1.2 Device Naming Convention ??

That would then be a AM2434BS_F_F - correct?

Hello Nilabh.

Talking of the both stacks again: in Industrial Communication SDK 9.0.0.3 "https://software-dl.ti.com/processor-industrial-sw/esd/ind_comms_sdk/am243x/09_00_00_03/docs/api_guide_am243x/index.html"

there are wo entries:

The entry "EtherCAT SubDevice" under "Full Protocol Stacks from TI" would be the Kunbus solution.

The entry "EtherCAT SubDevice FWHAL" under "Third Party Protocol Stacks ..." would be the solution using the ET9300 from ETG/Beckhoff.

Correct?

rgds

Yes Fredrich, That's correct.

Hello Nilabh!

I hope I am correct and this is your first name :)?

As to my understanding Code Composer Studio does not support MISRA-C checking (verified throug some posts in the CCStudio forum).

So if we want to use Misra-C language checking we would have to switch to a different IDE.

a) Would it be possible to "transfer" both soplutions to a different IDE e.g IAR EWARM?

b) is there support from TI to switch to a different IDE with the examples?

rgds

Hi Fredrich,

We do not have recent term plans to switch to other ide. Also for MISRA-C report we use klckwork tool.

Hello Anand,

there might be a misunderstanding. We accept that TI will notr change the IDE.

But we wouldlike to know, what would be neccessary to migrate the examples to a different IDE?

rgds Friedrich

Friedrich Janus said:

here might be a misunderstanding. We accept that TI will notr change the IDE.

But we wouldlike to know, what would be neccessary to migrate the examples to a different IDE?

Hi Fredrich, The minimum requirement would be to get the example compiling in the other ide:

1. Compiler migration- Library compilation and example compilation.(CCS Uses ARM CLANG Compiler and IAR uses IAR compiler)

2. Startup file changes(if moving from ARM CLANG to IAR)

\3. Linker file changes.(As IAR linker script is different than ARM CLANG)

May I know if there is any challenge that you face with CCS and why do you want to migrate to IAR

Hello Anand,

as pointed out previously the issue is with IEC61508 certification of the TOOL. As to our understanding we would consider the IDE as a T2 tool according to IEC61508-4. This would mean that for functioal safety issues we would consider a certification of the tool, either by the supplier or by the user. As we do not feel fit to certify the tool ourselves we would have to rely on a IEC61508 certification of the supplier, i.e. Texas Instrument. This is not given. This is why we would  think of switrcheing the IDE. BTW: we consider the Eclipse-based IDE from TI aswell integrated and would love to live with this but we have requirements from the project and this functional safety.

rgds