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.

LAUNCHXL-CC2650: Differences between version 1.1.1 vs. 1.2.1

Part Number: LAUNCHXL-CC2650
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: CC2650

Team-

Our customer has duplicated the launchpad schematic on their own design for ease of debugging.  We have the XDS110 side up and running, but are having difficulty connecting through to the CC2650.  Obviously, we have a real reference design launch pad to compare against.

We found that the customer based their design on version 1.1.1 of the Launchpad.  It appears that going to version 1.2, an additional level shifter was implemented to accomodate the bi-directional TMS line.  In our version, the TMS line is connected directly from the TM4C1294 (debugger) to the CC2650, as the TMS_DIR line was not implemented in 1.1.1.

We don't see any activity on the TMS_DIR line however.

It is very difficult to add this 74...245 level shifter- do we absolutely need to have it?  Seems like it wasn't necessary on version 1.1? 

We are having difficulty getting the CC2650 connected to the debugger, so we must run this down.  Thanks.

Best, S. Dunbar, AFA Colorado

  • Hi Steve,

    The level shifters are only required if the debugger is running at a different voltage level than the CC2650. If you do not use level shifters you can simply ignore the TMS_DIR signal.

    I am not really sure I understand why they have implemented the actual debugger in their design. Why not simply use the LaunchPad to debug their board?

    Best regards,
    Fredrik
  • Thanks for your response; I can not discuss publicly the architecture decision, please feel free to follow up with me over email if you like.