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.

Pin assignment in CCS 5.x

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CONTROLSUITE

Hello,

I have created a CCS project for a F28069PN (80 Pins) Microcontroller.

Now we are using the F28069PZ (100 Pins) Microcontroller.

 

Microcontroller core is the same but the pin layout is different.

 

Do I have to change anything in the CCS project?

The Target Configuration File, for example, does not distinguish between

different PIN-Layouts of the same Microcontroller.

  • Hi,

    Nope you don't have to change anything. Please proceed with your implementation.

    Regards,

    Gautam

  • Hi!

    I don't agree fully. There are some hardware differents ( refer please to Table 2-1. Hardware Features of datasheet). Perhaps you need to change something in your source code. It depends on what hardware resources you have used in 100-pin version. And of course you need to think about new design of PCB.

    Regards,

    Igor

  • Thanks for the reply.

    Hardware Layout is already done (not my task).

    I'm using a example project from the TI controlSUITE as Code Basis.

    To configure a GPIO Pin I write something like this:

    GpioCtrlRegs.GPAMUX2.bit.GPIO16 = 1;

    I was just wondering how Code Composer Studio knows how to map GPIO16 to the correct pin.

    In the 80-pin PN/PFP Version of the F28069 uC the Input of the Analog-Digital Converter "ADCINA0" is placed at PIN 44.

    In the 100-Pin PZ/PZP Version of the F28069 uC the Input of the Analog-Digital Converer "ADCINA0" is placed at PIN 55.

  • Hi!

    In this context CCS (to be exact API of uC) "does not think" in terms of PIN but in terms of GPIO. And each GPIO is tied to the specific PIN.  

    Regards,

    Igor

  • According to datasheet, the GPIOs vary. GPIO initialization tend to change then but...

    I never did that... when my pin count changed! Thats why I replied with the previous answer immediately without considering the facts. You too check this out and revert!

    Regards,

    Gautam