• AVR Freaks

Helpful ReplyHot!Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 3 of 13
Author
Rohan_Shah
New Member
  • Total Posts : 19
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/08/03 01:27:17
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/02 06:29:10 (permalink)
0
When I'm saying "clock value remains 8MHz.", I'm talking about the clock value as defined and used in c code (For eg. #define _XTAL_FREQ  8000000). On hardware uc is running at 32MHz. But since MCC sees system clock as 8MHz, I have to carefully set all timing parameter to consider 4x multiplication of clock. (For eg. to generate time base of 1ms, I have to set the time base of 4ms and so on).
#41
florin.matei
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 36
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/10/23 00:55:13
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/02 07:37:00 (permalink)
0
Hi Rohan_Shah,
 
Can you please give us more details about the problem you are facing? I tried setting the frequency to 32 MHz and it is working for me. To get 32 MHz there a few things that you need to take care of in order for the device run at that frequency and the UI will not set the frequency to 32 MHz. Here are the steps (similar to IonutB's suggestions):
1. For the "System Clock Select" select "FOSC" as the option
2. For "Internal Clock" select "8MHz_HF"
3. Now go to the configuration bits and in the "CONFIG1"
4. Search for "Oscillator Selection" and make sure the "INTOSC oscillator..." option is selected
5. Go to "CONFIG2" 
6. Find the "PLL Enable" and make sure the "4x PLL enabled" is selected 
 
OR
6'. If the "4x PLL disabled" is selected make sure the "Software PLL Enabled" checkbox is selected.
 
If these settings are not set as above 32 MHz won't be generated.
 
I've attached a picture with my configuration.
 
*Tip: To quickly get to the PLL and FOSC config bits you can use the search bar (type FOSC and then press "Enter" and "PLLEN" and press "Enter" to get to the particular config bits). 
 
Best regards,
Florin Matei

Attached Image(s)

#42
IonutB
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 115
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/08/04 09:43:55
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/02 07:38:43 (permalink)
0
I believe you're trying to use the MCC in a different way than it is intended. Either that, or we are not talking about the same steps of configuration. You're not supposed to get a 32MHz frequency by selecting INTOSC from the "System Clock Select" dropdown (SCS=INTOSC). I've enumerated the two ways you can get 32MHz in the post above. 
From the datasheet:
The 4xPLL is not available for use with the internal
oscillator when the SCS bits of the OSCCON register
are set to ‘1x’. The SCS bits must be set to ‘00’ to use
the 4xPLL with the internal oscillator.
 
If you're still in doubt, you can zip your project and attach it here, send it to me via a private message, or to MC2_Support@microchip.com. Our team will get back to you as soon as possible.
#43
Rohan_Shah
New Member
  • Total Posts : 19
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/08/03 01:27:17
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/02 07:53:56 (permalink)
0
Sorry. It was my mistake of not selecting system clock as FOSC. While writing code before MCC since SCS bits were 00 by default it has slipped out of mind. Sorry for the trouble.
#44
florin.matei
Super Member
  • Total Posts : 36
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/10/23 00:55:13
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/02 08:16:18 (permalink)
0
No problem. I'm glad things got sorted out!
 
Best regards,
Florin 
#45
Rohan_Shah
New Member
  • Total Posts : 19
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/08/03 01:27:17
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/06 23:57:43 (permalink)
0
Does MCC supports 9-bit UART implementation?
For configuration, There is an option to specify data length and generated code also initializes corresponding bits in TXSTA & RXSTA. But I don't see 9th bit support for read-write function. Following is the function generated for read/write interface:
uint8_t EUSART_Read(void);
void EUSART_Write(uint8_t txData);

Ideally it should have 9th bit too as 9th bit wont be constant throughout the packet. 'Cause most of the time this 9th bit will be used for parity which will differ from byte to byte.
Am I missing something or it is in the to do list?
#46
IonutB
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 115
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/08/04 09:43:55
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/11 06:10:52 (permalink)
3 (1)
Hi Rohan,
 
The MCC v2.0 does not support 9-bit UART communication. It is on our "to do" list, indeed. However, you can set up the EUSART module to work in 9-bit mode via MCC and write your own Read/Write routines. 
#47
Rohan_Shah
New Member
  • Total Posts : 19
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/08/03 01:27:17
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/11 06:49:11 (permalink)
0
Ok.
#48
Microcontrollers
Starting Member
  • Total Posts : 76
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2010/12/23 17:22:24
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/13 17:19:36 (permalink)
0
Hi,
I have a (hopefully) fairly simple suggestion for future versions of the Code Configurator.
 
At the moment it generates function names that look something like this:
EUSART_Initialize()
EUSART_Read()
SYSTEM_Initialize()
INTERRUPT_GlobalInterruptEnable()
 
However, I think it would be great if we could choose the naming convention used with the source code. This would be helpful for those who use a different naming convention in their code. Obviously we can just manually go through the files and rename the functions but I think the option of naming convention would still be a nice idea.
 
For example:
For EUSART_Initialize() allow the user to pick from naming styles like this:
EUSARTInitialize()
EusartInitialize()
eusart_initialize() <- This one would probably be the most useful option.
 
Basically, some people are more used to different naming conventions, it would be great if they were given the choice of which one the configurator uses.
I hope I've made it clear what suggestion I'm proposing!
 
PS. I think it has accidentally posted this a couple of times and I don't know how to remove a post, sorry!
#49
HTran
New Member
  • Total Posts : 1
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2014/06/16 14:39:03
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/16 14:45:40 (permalink)
0
Hello, MC2 would be a great tool for a newbie like me.
 
I noticed none of the support devices have ECAN.  Will next release have ECAN configurations for the PIC18F25K80, that was mentioned on a previous post?
 
Also, what is MC2 release schedule so I know when to expect the next release and hopefully get the above feature? 
#50
IonutB
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 115
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2008/08/04 09:43:55
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/06/19 02:02:32 (permalink)
0
@Microcontrollers: thanks for your interesting suggestion. We'll add it to our proposal list for the next release.
 
@HTran: at this moment there are no plans to support new PIC18 devices in the next MCC release. We will definitely add some more in the future, but not in MCC v2.10.
 
#51
p.manning
New Member
  • Total Posts : 4
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/08/21 21:58:38
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/07/16 06:46:27 (permalink)
0
Allow each Configuration in a MPLAB Project to have a separate a MCC Configuration and set of generated files.
 
This would be useful when a project is to be built for multiple PIC targets.  For example a project that targets a PIC16 might want to add a MPLAB Configuration for a PIC18 device to allow a higher performance option while maintaining code support for existing PIC16 boards.
 
One way might be to allow the device_config.mcc XML to have multiple "configuration" sections, one for each MPLAB Configuration.  It appears that the file path is already stored in the configuration data.  Even if one had to initially setup the extra MCC "configuration" section by hand, it would be very useful.
#52
p.manning
New Member
  • Total Posts : 4
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/08/21 21:58:38
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/07/16 06:58:40 (permalink)
5 (1)
The ability to surround the users added code in MCC Generated Files with special flags in the comments so that when the file is regenerated, MCC could know that the user wanted the code between the flags to be brought forward into the newly generated file.  The side-by-side difference screen is very nice, but it would be nice if I could tag the code I always want copied to the new generated files.
 
// MCC_USER_CODE_START
// MCC_USER_CODE_END
 
For example, the tool VGDD uses kind of the opposite technique to flag its 
// MainHead
// VGDD_MPLABX_WIZARD_START_SECTION: MainHead *** DO NOT DELETE THIS LINE! ***
 
#53
picworker
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 47
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/10/21 14:45:47
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/07/16 10:12:39 (permalink)
0
p.manning,
 
Thanks for you suggestions. 
 
We are considering several ways MCC can support multiple PIC targets in the future.  Using the MPLAB X project configurations might be part of the solution.
 
The difference tool used by MCC is provided as part of Netbeans.  Currently there is no support for identifying separate "user code" sections in a file, but it would certainly be a useful feature.  We continue to look for methods that allow users to modify generated files, and still allow MCC to regenerate the unmodified sections of the files.
 
#54
p.manning
New Member
  • Total Posts : 4
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/08/21 21:58:38
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/08/08 06:44:18 (permalink)
0
In some cases it would be nice to optionally have the port information (i.e. RA1/AN2) on the Pin Manager Package view (graphical view of the package).  Currently it has the package pin number (i.e. 1-28) but does not indicate the port information.  Most of the time I like it as is, but I would like to have an option to turn on the display of the port information.  Since this information is available in the table view this feature should be a low priority.
#55
p.manning
New Member
  • Total Posts : 4
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2007/08/21 21:58:38
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re:Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/08/08 06:59:34 (permalink)
0
In the Pin Manager Table view, it would be useful to be able to optionally display the other Module/Function possibilities for a Pin that is locked.  Maybe a grayed out unlocked graphic.  When trying to re-allocate the pin usage for another revision of the hardware it would nice to view the different options without having to unlock all of the pins.  Of course the default behavior should be, as it is now, that options not selected for a locked pin are hidden.
#56
grahamst
Starting Member
  • Total Posts : 33
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2010/11/05 04:13:55
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/08/13 09:01:53 (permalink)
0
Hi,
 
Is there a roadmap for CPU's which will get support in MCC ???.
 
Just used the tool and was very impressed on a low-end Pic16F1708 design.
 
Now just tried to start a new project with a Pic24FJ64GA102 - only to be disappointed as its not supported :-((. In fact there are VERY few Pic24's supported :-((.
 
Pity because this made such a BIG difference in getting a new CPU project started :-O.
 
BR
 
Graham
 
#57
rdtsc
Starting Member
  • Total Posts : 47
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/01/21 11:13:18
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/09/09 10:44:52 (permalink)
0
Hello, could we request the 18F67J94 (or series) be put on the "to-do" list? Enjoyed using the MCC on an 18LF26K22, now need to migrate. MCC cut prototype time in half! :)
#58
rdtsc
Starting Member
  • Total Posts : 47
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/01/21 11:13:18
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/09/09 11:27:24 (permalink)
3 (1)
Hello Florin, and thanks for taking suggestions. Recently MCC included 18LF26k22 support, so I tried it with that PIC and was very impressed! :)
 
In my application, I used both of the 18LF26k22's EUSARTs in a pass-through fashion from PC <-> PIC <-> 2nd device. The only issue is that the 2nd device expects RTS/CTS flow control. With such tiny TX/RX buffers on these embedded devices, it seemed like a good thing to implement.
 
But there is no provision for RTS/CTS in MCC, so I was left modifying the generated EUSART1/2 code. Throw in four EUSART interrupts to handle 115kbaud bidirectionally, and things got very messy.
 
As others may be interested in this also, could we possibly see a "CTS/RTS Flow Control" option be added to the EUSART configurator?
 
#59
picworker
Moderator
  • Total Posts : 47
  • Reward points : 0
  • Joined: 2013/10/21 14:45:47
  • Location: 0
  • Status: offline
Re: Suggestions for the next release of MPLAB® Code Configurator 2014/09/17 13:57:52 (permalink)
3 (1)
Hello rdtsc,
 
Glad to hear you are enjoying using MCC.  We will add your request for the PIC18F97J94 family of devices to our list of requested devices.
#60
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 3 of 13
Jump to:
© 2019 APG vNext Commercial Version 4.5