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.

CCSv5 support of TMS320LC548?

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TMS320LC548

We have an exisiting customer...

She is using the TMS320LC548 with an old version of CCS.  Needs to migrate to a CCSv5 because she recently upgraded to Windows 7 OS.  She has been told that the TMS320LC548 is not supported by CCSv5.  Is this true?  What CCS version can support TMS320LC548 on Win7 OS?

  • Hi Lou,

    CCSv5 does support C54x. It doesn't show up in the list of devices in the basic view of the Target Configuration editor, you can switch to the advanced view and create a custom configuration. It should just be selecting the connection (emulator) and the the c54x CPU.



  • Hi,

    CCSv5 ships with the code generation tools (compiler/assembler/linker) that still supports all C54x devices (548 included). Being a newer version of the compiler, though, implies that there will be differences from the executable generated with the previous version (especially if optimization was used).

    If the customer intends to perform debugging, it is possible that a target configuration created for a similar device (C5409, for example) will work with the 548 (the internal JTAG structure is very similar). However, keep in mind that parallel port emulators are not supported in Windows 7 (check here).

    Also, if DSP/BIOS was used in the original project and the CCS is older than 3.x, the migration will be more involving as more radical changes were done to this real-time kernel. For that they will have more luck recreating the project with a newer version of DSP/BIOS, but it would be interesting to check with the experts in the BIOS forum.

    Obviously the migration only makes sense if the product is in active development. If, however, it is only in maintenance mode (a few sporadic addition of features and bug fixes over the years), I would strongly advise keeping the older PC with a compatible OS (XP) and "freezing" the development environment. This guarantees the least disruption in the existing code.

    Hope this helps,