From andreic at chichak.ca Mon Jan 1 15:46:35 2007 From: andreic at chichak.ca (Andrei Chichak) Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2007 14:46:35 -0700 Subject: [Efi332] alternate processors In-Reply-To: <8C8FA4DCF9AAAF8-9FC-6A34@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> References: <20061228193553.D30FTGGVEN@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> <8C8F995E95E3BD0-9FC-5213@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20061230065838.D0TMXQ7S3C@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> <8C8FA4DCF9AAAF8-9FC-6A34@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> At 10:19 AM 12/30/2006, you wrote: >I came across some mention of the "bigstuff3" controller and saw >that he is using an Infineon TriCore processor. Is there anyone on >this list who has worked with these? Or for that matter anything >non-Freescale? Just curious to hear feedback relative to Freescale offerings. I had a look at the processor that is in the bigstuff3, he calls it the SABC 16x but it should be the SAB C16X. We were looking for a processor that would do various timing related tasks, nothing too esoteric, just a whole bunch of it. The candidates were PICs, 68HC12s, Analog's Blackfin, the C16x, and the 68332. We went for the '332 because the TPU gave us a huge amount of flexability, which is a huge advantage when management keeps changing the specs. We were also looking for a well established processor from a well established company. As it turns out we rolled our own microcode to give a bunch of UARTs, PWM, an extra SPI, and some digital I/O. As I said, nothing too esoteric, but it was really easy to add an extra UART without adding extra chips. On the bigstuff3 pages he has a processor comparison. As far as the customers are concerned this metric is pretty irrelevant. If the system idles 50% of the time or 75% of the time and it does the job, then either processor is adequate. Also, if Motec needed a faster processor, they could switch their 68332 over to an MPC56X or a Coldfire with a TPU much easier than switching to the "faster" C16X family. Basically then C16X looked like a pretty normal but fast processor. Andrei From A6intruder at adelphia.net Tue Jan 2 21:02:20 2007 From: A6intruder at adelphia.net (Daniel Nicoson) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 22:02:20 -0500 Subject: [Efi332] test, please read In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Got the email. Dan Nicoson -----Original Message----- From: efi332-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:efi332-bounces at diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Steve Ravet Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 6:20 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org; diy_efi at diy-efi.org; efi332 at diy-efi.org Subject: [Efi332] test, please read It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, then that means they aren't working. --steve ------------------- Steve Ravet ARM steve.ravet at arm.com _______________________________________________ Efi332 mailing list Efi332 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Tue Jan 2 21:27:00 2007 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 21:27:00 -0600 Subject: [Efi332] RE: [Gmecm] test, please read Message-ID: Y'all weren't paying enough attention over the holidays... It expired, and if you tried diy-efi.org over the last couple days you were treated to a lovely picture of spring flowers and links to adjustable beds, kitchen wares, and other nice things. Looks like the mail queued up and was delivered, though, so hopefully all is well. --steve > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Mark Romans > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 9:14 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] test, please read > > Got it! Web site is still up too! > Mark > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Ravet" > To: ; ; > Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 3:20 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] test, please read > > > It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and > someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I > think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, > then that means they aren't working. > > --steve > > ------------------- > Steve Ravet > ARM > steve.ravet at arm.com > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Tue Jan 2 21:51:33 2007 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2007 21:51:33 -0600 Subject: [Efi332] alternate processors Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: efi332-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:efi332-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Andrei Chichak > Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 3:47 PM > To: efi332 at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Efi332] alternate processors > > At 10:19 AM 12/30/2006, you wrote: > >I came across some mention of the "bigstuff3" controller and > saw that > >he is using an Infineon TriCore processor. Is there anyone on this > >list who has worked with these? Or for that matter anything > >non-Freescale? Just curious to hear feedback relative to > Freescale offerings. I work with ARM processors all the time. Much higher clock speeds than CPU32 cores, and some include caches and MMUs. 32 bit address space, and from 32 to 128 bit internal datapaths. Also a 16 bit instruction set that provides reduced access to the normal internal datapath. They're available in highly integrated versions from many different manufacturers. > and the 68332. We went for the > '332 because the TPU gave us a huge amount of flexability, > which is a huge advantage when management keeps changing the > specs. We were also looking for a well established processor > from a well established company. Unfortunately ARM doesn't have a TPU and I don't know if any ARM partners have one. But ARM qualifies on the other 2 counts! --steve From dave_irina at skycasters.net Wed Jan 3 08:14:09 2007 From: dave_irina at skycasters.net (David Eicher) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 08:14:09 -0600 Subject: [Efi332] test, please read In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200701030912242.SM05204@Dell8400> I received the email. I'd hate to lose this list, I'm going to need it in the future! Thanks, Dave -----Original Message----- From: efi332-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:efi332-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steve Ravet Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 5:20 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org; diy_efi at diy-efi.org; efi332 at diy-efi.org Subject: [Efi332] test, please read It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, then that means they aren't working. --steve ------------------- Steve Ravet ARM steve.ravet at arm.com _______________________________________________ Efi332 mailing list Efi332 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 From efi332 at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 3 08:32:15 2007 From: efi332 at sbcglobal.net (Robert) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 06:32:15 -0800 Subject: [Efi332] test, please read In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <459BBE6F.6060506@sbcglobal.net> Steve Ravet wrote: > It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and > someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I > think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, > then that means they aren't working. > > --steve > > ------------------- > Steve Ravet > ARM > steve.ravet at arm.com > _______________________________________________ > Efi332 mailing list > Efi332 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 > > Got the email. Went to http://www.diy-efi.org/ and it appears to be working? Robert From bowtievette at aol.com Wed Jan 3 14:27:06 2007 From: bowtievette at aol.com (bowtievette at aol.com) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 15:27:06 -0500 Subject: [Efi332] alternate processors In-Reply-To: <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> References: <20061228193553.D30FTGGVEN@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> <8C8F995E95E3BD0-9FC-5213@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20061230065838.D0TMXQ7S3C@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> <8C8FA4DCF9AAAF8-9FC-6A34@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <8C8FD8CAB882611-14B8-421B@FWM-D43.sysops.aol.com> Andrei, Is your '332 project a new one or the same that you guys had previously? Have you guys plunged into anything using the eTPU? Bigstuff3's processor comparison is interesting. His Gen1 system reportedly used dual Motorola processors (332's?), but he must have switched to Infineon with the gen3. Makes me wonder what drove that decision since as you point out, it would probably have been an easier transition to the MPC5xx or perhaps the Coldfire w/eTPU. I haven't done any research on it but based on how he ranks it relative to the '332, I imagine the SAB C16X on par with the 5xx, and below the 55xx. Looks like his price point is a fair bit lower than FAST et al. -----Original Message----- From: andreic at chichak.ca To: efi332 at diy-efi.org Sent: Mon, 1 Jan 2007 4:46 PM Subject: Re: [Efi332] alternate processors At 10:19 AM 12/30/2006, you wrote: >I came across some mention of the "bigstuff3" controller and saw >that he is using an Infineon TriCore processor. Is there anyone on >this list who has worked with these? Or for that matter anything >non-Freescale? Just curious to hear feedback relative to Freescale offerings. I had a look at the processor that is in the bigstuff3, he calls it the SABC 16x but it should be the SAB C16X. We were looking for a processor that would do various timing related tasks, nothing too esoteric, just a whole bunch of it. The candidates were PICs, 68HC12s, Analog's Blackfin, the C16x, and the 68332. We went for the '332 because the TPU gave us a huge amount of flexability, which is a huge advantage when management keeps changing the specs. We were also looking for a well established processor from a well established company. As it turns out we rolled our own microcode to give a bunch of UARTs, PWM, an extra SPI, and some digital I/O. As I said, nothing too esoteric, but it was really easy to add an extra UART without adding extra chips. On the bigstuff3 pages he has a processor comparison. As far as the customers are concerned this metric is pretty irrelevant. If the system idles 50% of the time or 75% of the time and it does the job, then either processor is adequate. Also, if Motec needed a faster processor, they could switch their 68332 over to an MPC56X or a Coldfire with a TPU much easier than switching to the "faster" C16X family. Basically then C16X looked like a pretty normal but fast processor. Andrei _______________________________________________ Efi332 mailing list Efi332 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070103/93257828/attachment.html From andreic at chichak.ca Wed Jan 3 22:58:46 2007 From: andreic at chichak.ca (Andrei Chichak) Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 21:58:46 -0700 Subject: [Efi332] alternate processors In-Reply-To: <8C8FD8CAB882611-14B8-421B@FWM-D43.sysops.aol.com> References: <20061228193553.D30FTGGVEN@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> <8C8F995E95E3BD0-9FC-5213@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20061230065838.D0TMXQ7S3C@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> <8C8FA4DCF9AAAF8-9FC-6A34@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> <8C8FD8CAB882611-14B8-421B@FWM-D43.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <20070104045850.84B5L69LVC@priv-edmwaa06.telusplanet.net> At 01:27 PM 1/3/2007, you wrote: >Andrei, >Is your '332 project a new one or the same that you guys had >previously? Have you guys plunged into anything using the eTPU? No, and yes, ummm. I did the evaluation of processors back in 2000 for the previous medical equipment project. Subsequently all the engineering staff were deemed redundant and 3 of us started our own development and consulting business. Just recently we bought a heap of the '332 processor boards and I am currently working on an environmental project with them. As for the eTPU, while I was doing the medical gig I kept in contact with Axiom Manufacturing, who make most of the demonstration boards for Freescale, and I had a look at the MCF5235. I thought it made a really nice replacement for the '332 - 2 TPUs, lots of speed, hummana hummana hummana, but WHAT THE HECK??? the second TPU is on the same pins as the ethernet - DOH! Perhaps in the future when I get forced. That would mean putting together another tool chain (I have m68k-elf-gcc, Cygwin et. al. working with Eclipse and P&Es debugger) and I would have to figure out how to program the eTPU and if it included a $3K compiler I'd pass. >Bigstuff3's processor comparison is interesting. His Gen1 system >reportedly used dual Motorola processors (332's?), but he must have >switched to Infineon with the gen3. Makes me wonder what drove that >decision since as you point out, it would probably have been an >easier transition to the MPC5xx or perhaps the Coldfire w/eTPU. There could be a couple of things going on here, he could have been using HC16s without the TPU which would have no great follow on, and considering that the C16x series seems to be 16 bit processors, it would be a smaller jump than to a PowerPC. Second, a lot of main stream people are using the MPC5xx and Bigstuff3 might have been looking for some way to distinguish his product from the others. Third, he could have lost his programmer and got someone else with a different set of prejudices - kind of the tail wagging the dog. Or it could be that he had to re-architect his system to avoid getting sued by FAST. > I haven't done any research on it but based on how he ranks it > relative to the '332, I imagine the SAB C16X on par with the 5xx, > and below the 55xx. It could be based on bogo-mips or some looks good on paper measure. Doesn't a 33Mhz RISC box run almost twice the speed of a 20Mhz CISC box? Not necessarily? Andrei From gm at ib-magin.de Thu Jan 4 01:49:30 2007 From: gm at ib-magin.de (Gunter Magin) Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 08:49:30 +0100 Subject: [Efi332] alternate processors In-Reply-To: <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> References: <20061228193553.D30FTGGVEN@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> <8C8F995E95E3BD0-9FC-5213@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20061230065838.D0TMXQ7S3C@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> <8C8FA4DCF9AAAF8-9FC-6A34@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <20070104074930.GA29361@mailhub.intra> Hi all, On Mon, Jan 01, 2007 at 02:46:35PM -0700, Andrei Chichak wrote: > At 10:19 AM 12/30/2006, you wrote: > >I came across some mention of the "bigstuff3" controller and saw > >that he is using an Infineon TriCore processor. Is there anyone on > >this list who has worked with these? Or for that matter anything > >non-Freescale? Just curious to hear feedback relative to Freescale > >offerings. > > I had a look at the processor that is in the bigstuff3, he calls it > the SABC 16x but it should be the SAB C16X. We were looking for a 16x or C16x isn't a TriCore, it is a plain 16bit processor based on a 15+ year old 16bit core design, with quite some nice peculiarities, e.g. fast context switches by exchanging the whole register bank with one instruction. It also features different memory models (small, huge, etc.), just like back in times of the '286. Development environment is either Keil (though support may have ceased since they were bought by ARM), or Tasking. There is also a (non-GPL'd) GCC port by HighTec. It also has interesting programming instructions, like setting a HW bit or clearing it. However, this is not the Tricore. Tricore processors are named TC11xx. The automotive series is TC116x. They feature DSP instructions, like the famous MAC (multiply-add) for digital filter structures, so Infineon marketing sells it as a general purpose processor AND a DSP in one core. I forgot what they mean with the 3rd core. 5 years ago, when Freescale lacked behind with their MPC55xx series, and MPC5xx stuck at 56MHz, while market demanded more beef, Infineon won quite some designs in the German automotive scene, and I started to befriend with the thought to switch to Tricore. But since Freescale caught up with higher frequencies, improved architecture (eTPU), it got a little silent about Tricore. This does not mean that the Tricore is dead or no longer developed, it is just my personal impression. An other reason for not being that successful was probably, that they initially had trouble with their embedded flash process. This seems to be sorted out now, but it cost them reputation. Meanwhile they have developed the core the usual way, like deeper pipelines, smaller structures, a wider portfolio of IO, etc. Tricore has a totally different concept of doing cam/crank decoding and ignition/spark timing, than Freescale followed with the 332, MPC5xx, Coldfire or MPC55xx. AFAIK there is no microcode involved. And to finally answer Andrei's question: I have considered to work with the Tricore, but haven't got my hands dirty. But I have quite some experience with the C16x, especially C167CR, though not in the automotive area. Feel free to ask. > Basically then C16X looked like a pretty normal but fast processor. Yes. It compares well with the 332 at 25MHz. gm From bowtievette at aol.com Thu Jan 4 17:03:32 2007 From: bowtievette at aol.com (bowtievette at aol.com) Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:03:32 -0500 Subject: [Efi332] alternate processors In-Reply-To: <20070104074930.GA29361@mailhub.intra> References: <20061228193553.D30FTGGVEN@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> <8C8F995E95E3BD0-9FC-5213@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20061230065838.D0TMXQ7S3C@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> <8C8FA4DCF9AAAF8-9FC-6A34@webmail-da12.sysops.aol.com> <20070101220130.67XPCSS7JW@priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net> <20070104074930.GA29361@mailhub.intra> Message-ID: <8C8FE6BB07933BE-178C-9511@webmail-da16.sysops.aol.com> >Andrei wrote: >As for the eTPU, while I was doing the medical gig I kept in contact with Axiom >Manufacturing, who make most of the demonstration boards for Freescale, and I >had a look at the MCF5235. I thought it made a really nice replacement for the >'332 - 2 TPUs, lots of speed, hummana hummana hummana, but WHAT THE HECK??? the >second TPU is on the same pins as the ethernet - DOH! Perhaps in the future when >I get forced. That would mean putting together another tool chain (I have >m68k-elf-gcc, Cygwin et. al. working with Eclipse and P&Es debugger) and I would >have to figure out how to program the eTPU and if it included a $3K compiler I'd >pass. I have the same reaction to the TPU/ethernet port sharing. I guess they must be thinking that TPU users don't need both. Thats bad enough but its the "e" in the TPU thats the real stinker. It would appear to me that they've added an unnecessary layer to the TPU requiring an expensive proprietary compiler that will likely never become generally available thus adding another barrier for lower volume use. That might not be completely unacceptable, except that the automotive binaries for the eTPU are still not available to even start from or just to evaluate. From a distance, there does not appear to be significantly more functionality in the eTPU than the TPU3 so I'm left wondering where the improvement is. I'll be sticking with the 5xx. If they would add an SCC to it (they won't), it would be almost perfect. > >Gunter wrote: >16x or C16x isn't a TriCore, it is a plain 16bit processor based on a 15+ >year old 16bit core design, with quite some nice peculiarities, e.g. >fast context switches by exchanging the whole register bank with one >instruction. It also features different memory models (small, huge, >etc.), just like back in times of the '286. Development environment is >either Keil (though support may have ceased since they were bought by >ARM), or Tasking. There is also a (non-GPL'd) GCC port by HighTec. >It also has interesting programming instructions, like setting a HW bit >or clearing it. > >However, this is not the Tricore. Tricore processors are named TC11xx. The >automotive series is TC116x. They feature DSP instructions, like the >famous MAC (multiply-add) for digital filter structures, so Infineon >marketing sells it as a general purpose processor AND a DSP in one >core. I forgot what they mean with the 3rd core. >... >.. >. >Meanwhile they have developed the core the usual way, like deeper >pipelines, smaller structures, a wider portfolio of IO, etc. > >Tricore has a totally different concept of doing cam/crank decoding and >ignition/spark timing, than Freescale followed with the 332, MPC5xx, Coldfire >or MPC55xx. AFAIK there is no microcode involved. Its unclear exactly what processor is being used where in the bigstuff lineup. The bigstuff site shows that processor comparo that talks to the C16X but if you look at their gen4, it does use the Tricore. Regardless, I imagine they both do crank wheel decoding via interrupt handling as opposed to any TPU-like device so that explains the emphasis on processor and interrupt handling speed. I'm curious what total CPU overhead is associated with crank wheel decoding and servicing injection events etc. It appears from the MS site that they are doing crank wheel decoding in a relatively small fraction of total load. That with the MC9S12. ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070104/fe47b9eb/attachment.html From oswaldoof at gmail.com Fri Jan 5 19:10:49 2007 From: oswaldoof at gmail.com (Oswaldo Oliveira Filho) Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 23:10:49 -0200 Subject: [Efi332] test, please read In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <62043d110701051710s22da2ea5lfc78083548e88aa9@mail.gmail.com> Yes, it is working... Regards, Oswaldo On 12/31/06, Steve Ravet wrote: > > It seems that the guy that hosts diy-efi.org let the domain expire and > someone else has taken it. Not sure what the implications are but I > think the lists should still be working. If you don't get this email, > then that means they aren't working. > > --steve > > ------------------- > Steve Ravet > ARM > steve.ravet at arm.com > _______________________________________________ > Efi332 mailing list > Efi332 at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070105/1e02d0fe/attachment.html From dave_irina at skycasters.net Sun Jan 7 19:13:45 2007 From: dave_irina at skycasters.net (David Eicher) Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 19:13:45 -0600 Subject: [Efi332] eTPU Angle Clock In-Reply-To: <20061230065838.D0TMXQ7S3C@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> Message-ID: <200701072015926.SM04632@Dell8400> Hello list, I just stumbled onto this app note about the angle clock. It appears the angle clock might make tracking crankshaft angle easier (less complexity) than using PMM/PMMX. What do you think? http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/app_note/AN2897.pdf?fsrch=1 I've been trying to figure out how to track the 24X trigger wheel in my LS1 engine, this might make it a manageable task. Regards, Dave From bowtievette at aol.com Mon Jan 8 10:47:59 2007 From: bowtievette at aol.com (bowtievette at aol.com) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:47:59 -0500 Subject: [Efi332] eTPU Angle Clock In-Reply-To: <200701072015926.SM04632@Dell8400> Message-ID: <8C9015BE38FE606-1534-4B43@FWM-D33.sysops.aol.com> Dave, Looks like a nice function. Its more capable than PMM but I'm not sure I would say its any less complex. If Freescale ever releases the automotive functions for the eTPU to general distribution they might be worth a look. Are you working with an eTPU micro ? jc -----Original Message----- From: dave_irina at skycasters.net To: efi332 at diy-efi.org Sent: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 8:13 PM Subject: [Efi332] eTPU Angle Clock Hello list, I just stumbled onto this app note about the angle clock. It appears the angle clock might make tracking crankshaft angle easier (less complexity) than using PMM/PMMX. What do you think? http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/app_note/AN2897.pdf?fsrch=1 I've been trying to figure out how to track the 24X trigger wheel in my LS1 engine, this might make it a manageable task. Regards, Dave _______________________________________________ Efi332 mailing list Efi332 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070108/c221126f/attachment.html From mrgrimes1 at yahoo.com Mon Jan 8 16:35:09 2007 From: mrgrimes1 at yahoo.com (Darrin Garrett) Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:35:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Efi332] Re: Efi332 Digest, Vol 17, Issue 5 Message-ID: <245958.28473.qm@web33410.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Crank angle domain is far superior to PMM. I believe TPU mask G has it. No more free running counter error if the time between sparks ( rate of crankshaft) changes. Darrin efi332-request at diy-efi.org wrote: Send Efi332 mailing list submissions to efi332 at diy-efi.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to efi332-request at diy-efi.org You can reach the person managing the list at efi332-owner at diy-efi.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Efi332 digest..." Today's Topics: 1. eTPU Angle Clock (David Eicher) 2. Re: eTPU Angle Clock (bowtievette at aol.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 19:13:45 -0600 From: "David Eicher" Subject: [Efi332] eTPU Angle Clock To: Message-ID: <200701072015926.SM04632 at Dell8400> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Hello list, I just stumbled onto this app note about the angle clock. It appears the angle clock might make tracking crankshaft angle easier (less complexity) than using PMM/PMMX. What do you think? http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/app_note/AN2897.pdf?fsrch=1 I've been trying to figure out how to track the 24X trigger wheel in my LS1 engine, this might make it a manageable task. Regards, Dave ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 11:47:59 -0500 From: bowtievette at aol.com Subject: Re: [Efi332] eTPU Angle Clock To: efi332 at diy-efi.org Message-ID: <8C9015BE38FE606-1534-4B43 at FWM-D33.sysops.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Dave, Looks like a nice function. Its more capable than PMM but I'm not sure I would say its any less complex. If Freescale ever releases the automotive functions for the eTPU to general distribution they might be worth a look. Are you working with an eTPU micro ? jc -----Original Message----- From: dave_irina at skycasters.net To: efi332 at diy-efi.org Sent: Sun, 7 Jan 2007 8:13 PM Subject: [Efi332] eTPU Angle Clock Hello list, I just stumbled onto this app note about the angle clock. It appears the angle clock might make tracking crankshaft angle easier (less complexity) than using PMM/PMMX. What do you think? http://www.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/app_note/AN2897.pdf?fsrch=1 I've been trying to figure out how to track the 24X trigger wheel in my LS1 engine, this might make it a manageable task. Regards, Dave _______________________________________________ Efi332 mailing list Efi332 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070108/c221126f/attachment-0001.htm ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Efi332 mailing list Efi332 at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/efi332 End of Efi332 Digest, Vol 17, Issue 5 ************************************* __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070108/08b24fb1/attachment.html From bowtievette at aol.com Mon Jan 8 22:17:12 2007 From: bowtievette at aol.com (bowtievette at aol.com) Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2007 23:17:12 -0500 Subject: [Efi332] Re: Efi332 Digest, Vol 17, Issue 5 In-Reply-To: <245958.28473.qm@web33410.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <245958.28473.qm@web33410.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8C901BC2BE09993-3A0-7B8D@webmail-da01.sysops.aol.com> Last time I checked the TPU and eTPU are timer modules, so regardless of the units presented to the CPU, crank speed is measured in clock ticks. Hence there will always be errors when the crank accelerates or decelerates. A good interface to even the "old school" PMM/PMA routines will present in terms of a crank angle. It would appear that this new eTPU function just does this for you perhaps. I can not find an equivalent of the eTPU's angle clock function (other than PMM/PMA) in mask G or otherwise. There is a degree clock which is much more limited in function. Can you please research this and find a link for us? -----Original Message----- From: mrgrimes1 at yahoo.com To: efi332 at diy-efi.org Sent: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 5:35 PM Subject: [Efi332] Re: Efi332 Digest, Vol 17, Issue 5 Crank angle domain is far superior to PMM. I believe TPU mask G has it. No more free running counter error if the time between sparks ( rate of crankshaft) changes. Darrin ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/efi332/attachments/20070108/aba0732b/attachment.html