TMS320F28069: ePWM variable and SFO_TI_V6b_FPU library

Rein Kadastik

Part Number: TMS320F28069
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: C2000WARE

Apparently all the examples that use SFO_TI_V6b_FPU.lib to link against, also introduce the variable volatile struct EPWM_REGS *ePWM[]

If this variable is missing, then the link against the library will fail. Therefore I assume that the library uses that variable somehow.

So why is that variable needed and does it have to contain certain pointers or could it also be empty? Is it used to calibrate the PWM modules mentioned in that array?

over 7 years ago

0 Cody Watkins over 7 years ago

TI__Mastermind 42195 points

Rein,

You need to have that variable to build and use the library.

I know how it is used on newer versions, but will need to review what was done in the V6b version of the library. This should be fully transparent to the user and you should not need to worry about this after you define it.

Take a look at some of the examples in C2000Ware here: C:\ti\c2000\C2000Ware_1_00_06_00\device_support\f2806x\examples\c28

You will see that the HRPWM examples run the SFO without using the struct.

Regards,
Cody

0 Rein Kadastik over 7 years ago in reply to Cody Watkins

Prodigy 150 points

My application still calls the SFO() method to make regular HRPWM calibrations. Does the contents of the ePWM array (or lack thereof) somehow influence the requested SFO calibration?

0 Cody Watkins over 7 years ago in reply to Rein Kadastik

TI__Mastermind 42195 points

Rein,

Please take a look at the SFO appendix in the HRPWM section of the Technical Reference Manual. It will shed some light on the library. Do note:This is a library and the code is not publicly available.

In the V6b version of the library the SFO function should be called without any parameters, exactly as you are doing. The ePWM struct only needs to be defined by the user and is otherwise transparent to said user.

I recognize this is probably not exactly the answer you are looking for, but this is a protected IP.

If you are having any issues using the HRPWM or SFO feel free to start another thread.

Regards,
Cody

0 Pierre Bouchet1 over 7 years ago in reply to Cody Watkins

Expert 2615 points

Hi Cody,

Is there any way you can shed some light on my (tightly related) question here?

Thanks a lot,

Pierre

0 Cody Watkins over 7 years ago in reply to Pierre Bouchet1

TI__Mastermind 42195 points

I have replied in the other thread.

Regards,
Cody

0 Rein Kadastik over 7 years ago in reply to Cody Watkins

Prodigy 150 points

Thank you for your response. The TRM discusses SFO library shortly but never mentiones the ePWM array. So my final direct question: does it impact the operation of HRPWM is the ePWM array is left empty? Or should I declare all available ePWM modules in that array? Which one is preferred or does it make any difference?

0 Cody Watkins over 7 years ago in reply to Rein Kadastik

TI__Mastermind 42195 points

Rein,
This this device is tested and validated with the SW that is included in C2000Ware. For that reason my preference is that you define the ePWM array as done in the examples. (the examples define the entire array for all available HRPWMs)

Regards,
Cody

C2000™︎ microcontrollers

C2000 microcontrollers forum

TMS320F28069: ePWM variable and SFO_TI_V6b_FPU library