USB Host vs RLP, pick one!

Archive
1

As I mentioned couple times, we have implemented USB Host for the Cerb family; however, the chip is too small to fit all :frowning:

This is a tough decision and we need your input on this. USB Host or RLP for the Cerb family firmware? I love RLP but then that USB Host connector on cerbuino needs some action!

Click +1 on one of the options below for voting please. Do not cheat :slight_smile: Just one option!

2

USB Host

14 Likes
3

RLP

9 Likes
4

Must have both, remove something else! (tell us what in replies)

1 Like
5

How about, remove Gadgeteer?

ducks

7 Likes
6

It’s a real shame there is no way of modularising these things into assemblies that only need loading when used.

Otherwise I agree with godefroi that gadgeteer should go. What use is it on a cerbII40 anyway.

Could you release 2 builds that can be loaded via FEZ config?

  1. uSB + gadgeteer.
  2. RLP + USB.
  3. People that can do RLP don’t need gadgeteer surely!
7

@ hagster - there isn’t anything Gadgeteer in the firmware…

3 Likes
8

@ Bill Gates - that makes sense.

What about the idea of different firmware releases with different contents? Obviously it’s not great for support.

What other features are in there that might not be needed?

9

It would be much easier if we had a list of things that COULD be removed. What’s in there that could come out?

10

@ Gus - Can employees vote? 8)

11

Gary, you want to remove Gadgeteer??

12

@ godefroi - You weren’t supposed to point out the “+1”, if I lose my corner office over looking the golf course, I am coming to work with you! :whistle:

13

@ andre.m - Nevermind then I won’t vote. :smiley:

14

AFAIK Gadgeteer does not Count, it is deployed as part of the application code. Maybe the software I2C can go, but how much would that help ?

15

Request NicolasG to comment, he has worked with GCC + STM USB library for USB MSD.

How much was he able to squeeze in using GCC ? GHI should be able to go farther using the ARM RV compiler.

May be support less classes (keep MSD, HMI, RAW), drop printer, drop UVC (Cerb does not need this)…

16

How about this ?

1.User goes to https://www.ghielectronics.com/cerb/configure
2.User checks the features required (display a free memory graph)
3.User clicks download to download a DFU / BIN with the selected features + any core features.

easy said, but this may need work, stubs, and jumps and a lot of linker tweaking :).

3 Likes
17

I vote to have USB host.

However, the Cerb has enough space for both, no?. I use 256k of the on chip flash for storing settings and data. I cannot understand why they can’t both fit. That is unless you’re trying to fit the firmware onto that neo chip with half the flash…

18

Now, honestly… What’s the use of USB host?..

19

I’ve yet to use either, but I’d tend to vote for USB Host.

I like the suggestion of configurable firmware, with modular features, but I’m guessing that would require a good deal of work to implement. But if done right, that could conceivably be done for more than just cerb, so might have greater upside.

20

@ Valkyrie-MT - ram is the problem, not flash. Well, both but ram is more of an issue.