Truncated match.
PICList
Thread
'programming generic array logic (GAL)'
1998\01\15@154145
by
Bill (WL) Boulton
To the best information resource on the net,
I've been tossing around the idea of building my own GAL programmer for
16V8s and 20V8s, BUT! It seems that the people who make them (NS & SGS
Thompson) are keeping the programming specs a secret (lots o' money maybe).
I've found bits of info but no where near enough to actually do anything
other than increase curiosity and frustration.
I don't want to buy someone elses locked up code. I'll do it myself so I
can (fix.modify.expand) it. I've spent my last dollar on apps that were
not as good as they were crached up to be.
Any help would be greatly appreciated,
Bill.
1998\01\15@175900
by
Martin R. Green
|
This is the same problem I had many years ago. You are correct, the
GAL makers guard the programming specs like their life depends on it.
In fact, they have a good reason for this, programmer vendors quoting
a particular device compatibility must submit their programmer designs
for "certification" to ensure they reliably adhere to the programming
spec. This allows the GAL manufacturers to avoid heaps of calls from
small time developers complaining that their devices won't take a
program, when in fact, it is the fault of a "cheapie" programmer. I
believe they will not honour their guarantee if you try to program the
GAL on a non-certified programmer. Since each brand of GAL programs
differently, even for the same device number, you are probably best
off using a universal programmer that supports the devices you are
interested in (I own a Needham's EMP20, highly recommended!).
With that said, several electronics magazines have published GAL
programmer designs over the years, including, but not limited to,
Radio-Electronics (now Electronics Now), and Elektor, but typically
the range of devices supported are limited. The R-E programmer for
instance only worked with 16V8 and 20V8 devices, and most notably, NOT
with the popular 22V10 device. If you are willing to work with a
limited range of GAL's, there are inexpensive alternatives, but like I
said, the best solution is a universal programmer like the EMP20.
Incidentally, despite the fact that it was probably 10 years ago, I
still vividly remember a suggestion from the R-E article. To get
programming specs out of companies like Lattice, etc, send them a
letter on company letterhead explaining that you are designing a
universal programmer. They may ask you to sign a non-disclosure
agreement, but you might just get the info you are looking for.
CIAO - Martin.
On Thu, 15 Jan 1998 15:41:45 -0500, "Bill (WL) Boulton"
<spam_OUTbill-794TakeThisOuT
WINSHOP.COM.AU> wrote:
{Quote hidden}>To the best information resource on the net,
>
>I've been tossing around the idea of building my own GAL programmer for
>16V8s and 20V8s, BUT! It seems that the people who make them (NS & SGS
>Thompson) are keeping the programming specs a secret (lots o' money maybe).
>I've found bits of info but no where near enough to actually do anything
>other than increase curiosity and frustration.
>
>I don't want to buy someone elses locked up code. I'll do it myself so I
>can (fix.modify.expand) it. I've spent my last dollar on apps that were
>not as good as they were crached up to be.
>
>Any help would be greatly appreciated,
>
>Bill.
Martin R. Green
.....elimarKILLspam
@spam@NOSPAMbigfoot.com
To reply, remove the NOSPAM from the return address.
Stamp out SPAM everywhere!!!
1998\01\16@004505
by
John Payson
|
> I've been tossing around the idea of building my own GAL programmer for
> 16V8s and 20V8s, BUT! It seems that the people who make them (NS & SGS
> Thompson) are keeping the programming specs a secret (lots o' money maybe).
> I've found bits of info but no where near enough to actually do anything
> other than increase curiosity and frustration.
I agree that this situation can be at times frustrating; the problem, though,
oddly enough is not that the semiconductor manufacturers are scared about
other companies stealing their code, but that they're concerned about either:
[1] Having lots of hobbyists taking up the time of their engineers; it's
not that the companies are trying to be mean to hobbyists, but having
a $40/hour engineer spend half an hour on each hobbyist who may buy
perhaps $50 (retail) worth of parts is, frankly, not cost effective.
[2] Devices which are programmed improperly may fail in use, perhaps after
many hours of service. Chip vendors do not want any headaches or bad
reputations that could come from such device failures. Compared to
microcontrollers and xxROM chips, many PLD's are downright touchy in
their programming specifications.
[3] Manufacturers sometimes change the programming requirements for GALs
and PLD's slightly, even without changing the part number. In such
cases, the variable details of the specification will usually be coded
within the device and readable by the programmer. The flexibility to
change the specifications allows manufacturers to make improvements in
their manufacturing process, but a hobbyist's programmer which, e.g.,
uses a 4ms programming pulse because that's what lot#99223 required
may slag chips if it doesn't read the required pulse duration from
each device.
[4] Chip manufacturers who do make significant changes to programming requ-
irements (even ones they've documented in advance that they MIGHT make)
will notify programmer manufacturers so that they can ensure that the
programmers in fact continue to work with the new devices. If there are
20 certified programmer vendors, this is practical. If there are 500
vendors selling development programmers, this becomes a nightmare.
[5] For most programmable logic families, there are devices available from
selected manufacturers which are, in fact, easily programmable by well-
documented means. The 22V10isp from Lattice is an excellent example.
Such chips cost more, because manufacturers are either limitted in the
process improvements they can pursue, or else because they have to add
more circuitry to the chip to aid in programming. On the other hand,
for small hobbyists, dollar or two per chip is often a non-issue.
Note that some of these issues occur in other types of devices entirely.
For example, a company of a popular PC peripheral made hardware specifica-
tions available for free to anyone who agreed to the following (from mem-
ory):
[1] The recipient could use the information in his/her own compiled soft-
ware, and could release such software, but could not release the soft-
ware in source-code form or otherwise reveal how the hardware was
programmed.
[2] The recipient would not bother the company's tech-support people for
any assistance regarding the information provided.
[3] The vendor was under no obligation to continue to have their hardware
work the same way, and that he/she would add a disclaimer to any rel-
eased software to that effect.
If a PC hardware vendor puts on those restrictions, it's reasonable to see
why a GAL vendor would be equally paranoid...
1998\01\16@024222
by
Leon Heller
|
In message <3.0.3.16.19980115192719.216f8fec
KILLspammail.winshop.com.au>, "Bill
(WL) Boulton" <.....bill-794KILLspam
.....WINSHOP.COM.AU> writes
>To the best information resource on the net,
>
>I've been tossing around the idea of building my own GAL programmer for
>16V8s and 20V8s, BUT! It seems that the people who make them (NS & SGS
>Thompson) are keeping the programming specs a secret (lots o' money maybe).
>I've found bits of info but no where near enough to actually do anything
>other than increase curiosity and frustration.
>
>I don't want to buy someone elses locked up code. I'll do it myself so I
>can (fix.modify.expand) it. I've spent my last dollar on apps that were
>not as good as they were crached up to be.
>
>Any help would be greatly appreciated,
>
>Bill.
Lattice (they invented the GAL) gives away development and programming
software for their 22V10 ispGAL and other smaller isp CPLD parts on a
free CD-ROM. You use a simple in-circuit programming cable connected to
the PC printer port. I have a Lattice Starter Kit which includes the
cable, software and sample devices. They are quite cheap.
Leon
--
Leon Heller: EraseMEleonspam_OUT
TakeThisOuTlfheller.demon.co.uk http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk
Amateur Radio Callsign G1HSM Tel: +44 (0) 118 947 1424
See http://www.lfheller.demon.co.uk/dds.htm for details of my AD9850
DDS system - schematic and software.
1998\01\16@050324
by
wwl
On Thu, 15 Jan 1998 15:41:45 -0500, you wrote:
>To the best information resource on the net,
>
>I've been tossing around the idea of building my own GAL programmer for
>16V8s and 20V8s, BUT! It seems that the people who make them (NS & SGS
>Thompson) are keeping the programming specs a secret (lots o' money maybe).
I think the main reason for this is to avoid bad programmer designs
programming parts unreliably, giving the chips a bad rep. The only
PLD programming specs I've ever seen are the old TI bipolars, and
Cypress' early eprom devices.
____ ____
_/ L_/ Mike Harrison / White Wing Logic / wwl
spam_OUTnetcomuk.co.uk _/ L_/
_/ W_/ Hardware & Software design / PCB Design / Consultancy _/ W_/
/_W_/ Industrial / Computer Peripherals / Hazardous Area /_W_/
1998\01\16@081711
by
Keith Howell
|
I agree with the comments made about manufacturers not wanting a lot of
amateur device programmers about.
The problem seems to be one of their own making, i.e. a proliferation of
programming methods. You don't get the same problems putting data into RAM
chips, and EPROM programming algorithms are reasonably well documented.
Elektor did a GAL programmer that did a few types of 16V8 and 20V8.
It's 100x160 Eurocard, but the stupid placement of the LPT connector
means it can't slide into any Eurorack.
It has an on-board PSU (groan)
The I/O is done by a few cheap 4094 shift registers (minimises PCB tracks).
I built it, and bought the Elektor software disk (#15) - total cost c. #50
They then published a kludge board for 22V10s.
And wanted me to buy another disk (#15!)
They passed on my request for the Pascal source code to the author,
but I guess he is in the same position as the GAL maufacturers.
I made it when I had spare time and no job.
I then found a job and have no spare time for hobby electronics.
So it's just filling my junk box.
>From industrial experience, I found 22V10s are much more available
as producers feel less demand for smaller chips. Even if the logic
could fit in a 16V8, I'd layout the PCB for a 22V10 because someone
always asks for more at some stupid late stage in the design!
Try the Lattice chips. They're meant to be in-site programmable,
so they have to be quite open about programming so that people
can get their production jigs to program them.
Why not make a general-purpose parallel I/O port and PSU outlet.
With a standard connector like the Arcom Control Systems
signal conditioning bus connector (50-way IDC). Or opto-22.
Then you'd have a far more useful gadget which you could make
separate plug-in boards for:
- GAL programming
- EPROM programming
- Flash ROM programming
- I2C bus EEPROMs
- Smart cards
- PIC chips
- any thing you have yet to think of.
You'd also be able to use any of Arcom's off-the shelf
signal conditioning boards for opto-isolated switching of mains,
relays, etc. Why re-invent the wheel?
TTFN, KH
1998\01\16@202339
by
Bill (WL) Boulton
To all the people who responded on this thread,
Thanks heaps to all. It's greatly appreciated.
Bill
1998\01\17@215434
by
Tom Handley
|
Keith, I designed a Lattice ispLSI1016-based chip that implements
common microprocessor signals and a 19 Bit address bus. It connects
to PC bidirectional parallel ports where the control register, bit 5,
controls the direction. It does require an external 74xx245 bus
transceiver. I've used it for a variety of projects from interfacing A/Ds
to loading a Dallas 512K NVSRAM/Clock with math tables for my PIC-based
weather station. I intend to put it up on my `seriously in need of update'
web page soon. The following is a `snippet' from the spec:
- Tom
----------
Generates:
!CS ---------- !CS Chip Select
!RD ---------- !RD Read Data
!WD ---------- !WD Write Data
DIR --------- Data Direction for External Bus Buffer. 1 = Read (R/W)
HBEN -------- High Byte Enable
A0 -> A18 --- 19 Bit Address
States:
State S2 S1 S0 Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
0 0 0 0 !RD Generates !CS DIR = 1
1 0 0 1 !WD Generates !CS DIR = 0
2 0 1 0 LE0 A0 -> A7 Latch Enable DIR = 0
3 0 1 1 LE1 A8 -> A15 Latch Enable DIR = 0
4 1 0 0 LE2 A16 -> A18 Latch Enable DIR = 0
5 1 0 1 HBEN Latches HBEN from D0 DIR = 0
PC Parallel Port, FPGA Input/Output Interface:
DB25 FPGA PC Control FPGA Outputs
--------------------------------------- ---------------
1 STRB *14 SEL IN 3 !C0 !CS 25 I/O 8
2 D0 15 D0 I/O 0 !RD 26 I/O 9
3 D1 16 D1 I/O 1 !WD 27 I/O 10
4 D2 17 D2 I/O 2 DIR 28 I/O 11
5 D3 18 D3 I/O 3 HBEN 29 I/O 12
6 D4 19 D4 I/O 4 A0 10 I/O 31
7 D5 20 D5 I/O 5 A1 9 I/O 30
8 D6 21 D6 I/O 6 A2 8 I/O 29
9 D7 22 D7 I/O 7 A3 7 I/O 28
14 AutoFd *24 S0 IN 0 !C1 A4 6 I/O 27
16 Init *36 S1 IN 1 C2 A5 5 I/O 26
17 Select * 2 S2 IN 2 !C3 A6 4 I/O 25
18 GND A7 3 I/O 24
A8 44 I/O 23
* pDS Router assigned these Pins A9 43 I/O 22
A10 42 I/O 21
A11 41 I/O 20
A12 40 I/O 19
A13 39 I/O 18
FPGA Power: A14 38 I/O 17
A15 37 I/O 16
1,23 GND A16 32 I/O 15
12,34 Vcc A17 31 I/O 14
A18 30 I/O 13
At 01:10 PM 1/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
[snip]
{Quote hidden}>Try the Lattice chips. They're meant to be in-site programmable,
>so they have to be quite open about programming so that people
>can get their production jigs to program them.
>
>Why not make a general-purpose parallel I/O port and PSU outlet.
>With a standard connector like the Arcom Control Systems
>signal conditioning bus connector (50-way IDC). Or opto-22.
>
>Then you'd have a far more useful gadget which you could make
>separate plug-in boards for:
>- GAL programming
>- EPROM programming
>- Flash ROM programming
>- I2C bus EEPROMs
>- Smart cards
>- PIC chips
>- any thing you have yet to think of.
>You'd also be able to use any of Arcom's off-the shelf
>signal conditioning boards for opto-isolated switching of mains,
>relays, etc. Why re-invent the wheel?
>
>TTFN, KH
>
>
More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 1998
, 1999 only
- Today
- New search...