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.

SM320F2812-EP: Hi Rel Micro Specification, Gen 2 vs Gen 3, firmware compatibility and lifetime

Part Number: SM320F2812-EP
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMS320F28377D-EP, SM320F28335-EP

Dear TI C2000 Representative -

We're currently using SM320F2812-EP and need to upgrade to a device with more peripherals and a lot more memory.  We have a lot of firmware written for current the application based on the F2812 device that we want to preserve.  We also want to use a part that's newer with long life expectancy - as long as is possible based on your current estimates.  We need to maintain the hi-rel rating, so after a search it seems I'm limited to either SM320F28335-EP or TMS320F28377D-EP.  I understand the part I'm using now is a gen 2 device, the SM320F28335-EP is a gen 2 device the TMS320F28377D-EP is a gen 3 device. So, the first option will be code and peripheral compatible while the other will only be code compatible but is much newer.  I'm trying to answer the following:

1.  Since we have extensive code for the F2812 device.. What needs to change to port over to each of the devices I'm looking at?  I'm most concerned about the changes we need to make in order to get our old firmware to work with the Gen3 device peripherals.  Will the changes be minor or is the scope of the changes required very large?  Other than new safety features, what changes come with Gen 3 over Gen 2?  If the answer is "this depends on what you're using" I can provide a more detailed list of the peripherals we're leveraging in the current board.

2.  Can you provide the planned lifetime of all three of these micro controllers?   

Thank you very much for your help,

AG

  • Adam,

    I would start with this migration guide http://www.ti.com/lit/spraaq7 , that talks about the delta between the F281x and F2833x devices as there are some significant changes to the control periperhals(Event Manager vs ePWM/eCAP/eQEP) that occured on that device in terms of the control registers.  The ADC and comms peripherals have some enhancements, but the code should port fairly well.  Furthermore, the clock ratios/max speed is identical with those devices.  There are impreovements/additions(DMA, 0WS ADC Results) that could be added to improve performance but are not required.

    In terms of moving from the F2837x class, the changes from the F281x are fairly global in scope, i.e almost all peripherals would be different and there will likely be some touch required for all modules.  With that, there are certainly improvements over both the F281x and the F2833x devices so it would be largely dependent if you need those extra MIPS/CPU cores and even more Flash/RAM.

    For your 2nd question on the planned lifetimes of these devices I would refer to TI's published policy here http://www.ti.com/support-quality/quality-policies-procedures/product-life-cycle.html  All 3 devices you listed are in the "Active" state with no plans for obselescence.  

    If you'd like to share which periperhals you need, I can do a bit of a deeper analysis but my initial thought is that the F28335 would be the easier path for a code port.

    Best,

    Matthew

  • Matthew,

    These are the peripherals we need to port into one of the other devices.  I'm primarily interested in how much effort the firmware team will need to put into each peripheral if we choose the F28377, but if the enhancements to the control peripherals you listed above for the F28335 require code changes I'd like to know what they should expect for that device too.

    • All ADC channels
    • at least 6 PWM Channels
    • JTAG
    • CAN (2)
    • 2 serial interfaces for RS232 and RS422
    • 3 timer modules
    • the external interface is used for SRAM (GS74116AGP-10)
    • SPI
    • the buffered serial interface is being used for an external SPI EEPROM
    • external interrupts (XINT pins)

    I'm not sure we need to boost performance, so the main advantage to going to the F28377D would be that it is significantly newer and we'd expect that it will be around the longer than the gen 2 devices.

    Thank you for your help,

    Adam

  • Adam,

    I'll summarize below, but this guide details out the differences in peripheral across our C2000 MCUs(I should have attached this to my previous reply) https://www.ti.com/lit/spru566

    Module F281x F2833x F2837x
    ADC 12-bit/12.5MSPS/16 ch/3V FSR/2 ch Simul/Wrapper Type0(control regs) 12-bit/12.5MSPS/16 ch/3V FSR/2 ch Simul/Wrapper Type0(control regs)/improved Gain/Offset specs with built in trim 12 and 16 bit/4MSPS and 1MSPS/4x ADC on one chip/3V FSR/Wrapper Type 3
    PWM Event Manager(PWM/capture/QEP integrated) Seperate ePWM Module Type 0; available HRPWM Seperate ePWM Module Type 4; available HRPWM Type 4(basic register controls same as F2833x)
    JTAG 14 pin TI JTAG 14 pin TI JTAG 14 pin TI JTAG
    CAN eCAN  eCAN(same as F281x) DCAN(not SW compatible with eCAN)
    SCI Type 0 Type 0 Type 0
    Timer 3 CPU timers 3 CPU timers 3 CPU timers
    XINTF XINTF XINTF EMIF
    SPI Type0 Type0 Type2(added DMA support and 3wire mode)
    McBSP Type0 Type1(added DMA connection) Type1
    XINT Hard wired pins Configurable pins Configurable pins

    I'd encourage you and your team to take a look at the workshops for both the F2833x and the F2837x as I think it will help give a good baseline of some bigger differences from the F281x.

    https://training.ti.com/c2000-f2833x-microcontroller-workshop 

    https://training.ti.com/c2000-f2837xd-microcontroller-workshop

    Certainly the F2837x is our flagship MCU, and we have incorporated multiple rounds/years of feedback from our customers to add features that were not on the F281x or the F2833x device.  The increased capablility from the F2833x to the F2837x is substantial: with dual core capability(and pin to pin compatibility from the single core variant), 1MB of flash, independent CLA cores, effectively it has potential for 800MIPs just from a processor vs the 150MIPs on the F2833x.

    I appreciate the choice you have in terms of just going ahead and porting all the way to the newest device and being able to stay with it from a manufacuturing POV as well as having some headroom to add features down the line w/o having to change devices again.  

    Best,

    Matthew