USB Host versus Client Schematic Advice?

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Paul, Mar 6, 2008.

  1. Paul

    Paul Guest

    Hi,

    I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    schematic:

    http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_Rev2.1.pdf


    Look at page 21 and 22.

    If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    be one of the "Host" ports, right? Like i should delete the
    other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    they are "Clients", right?

    Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Paul

    donald Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    > schematic:
    >
    > http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_Rev2.1.pdf
    >
    >
    > Look at page 21 and 22.
    >
    > If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    > be one of the "Host" ports, right? Like i should delete the


    If you want a host port, yes, if you want a device port maybe.


    > other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    > they are "Clients", right?
    >
    > Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    > while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?
    >
    >


    I think you have more homework to do.

    Have you used a PC before ??

    Look at the PC in front of you.

    Another gmail lost puppy.

    Where do they keep coming from ??

    donald
     
    donald, Mar 6, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Paul

    Paul Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    > schematic:
    >
    > http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_Rev2.1.pdf
    >
    >
    > Look at page 21 and 22.
    >
    > If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    > be one of the "Host" ports, right? Like i should delete the
    > other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    > they are "Clients", right?
    >
    > Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    > while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?
    >


    Unzip the following package. It contains the USB 2.0 standard.
    Open usb_20.pdf and flip to the first page of Chapter 6. There,
    you'll see examples of upstream and downstream connectors.
    Your very own computer, uses the flat connector, so you can
    see an example in the I/O area on the back of your computer.

    http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_092407.zip

    If you want to be a USB designer, then reading these may
    help as well.

    http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/hs_usb_pdg_r1_0.pdf
    http://www.usb.org/developers/whitepapers/power_delivery_motherboards.pdf

    Paul
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #3
  4. Paul

    Paul Guest

    On Mar 5, 8:20�pm, Paul <> wrote:
    > Paul wrote:
    > > Hi,

    >
    > > � � � I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    > > schematic:

    >
    > >http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_R...

    >
    > > � � � Look at page 21 and 22.

    >
    > > � � � If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    > > be one of the "Host" ports, right? �Like i should delete the
    > > other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    > > they are "Clients", right?

    >
    > > � � �Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    > > while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?

    >
    > Unzip the following package. It contains the USB 2.0 standard.
    > Open usb_20.pdf and flip to the first page of Chapter 6. There,
    > you'll see examples of upstream and downstream connectors.
    > Your very own computer, uses the flat connector, so you can
    > see an example in the I/O area on the back of your computer.
    >
    > http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_092407.zip
    >
    > If you want to be a USB designer, then reading these may
    > help as well.
    >
    > http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/...opers/whitepapers/power_delivery_motherboards...
    >
    > � � Paul- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    want to be able to hook this one up correctly.

    So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    it will have to be a "Host" port, right? And this will be using
    the flat connectors, right?
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #4
  5. Paul

    sycochkn Guest

    "Paul" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    On Mar 5, 8:20?pm, Paul <> wrote:
    > Paul wrote:
    > > Hi,

    >
    > > ? ? ? I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    > > schematic:

    >
    > >http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_R...

    >
    > > ? ? ? Look at page 21 and 22.

    >
    > > ? ? ? If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    > > be one of the "Host" ports, right? ?Like i should delete the
    > > other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    > > they are "Clients", right?

    >
    > > ? ? ?Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    > > while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?

    >
    > Unzip the following package. It contains the USB 2.0 standard.
    > Open usb_20.pdf and flip to the first page of Chapter 6. There,
    > you'll see examples of upstream and downstream connectors.
    > Your very own computer, uses the flat connector, so you can
    > see an example in the I/O area on the back of your computer.
    >
    > http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_092407.zip
    >
    > If you want to be a USB designer, then reading these may
    > help as well.
    >
    > http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/...opers/whitepapers/power_delivery_motherboards...
    >
    > ? ? Paul- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -


    Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    want to be able to hook this one up correctly.

    So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    it will have to be a "Host" port, right? And this will be using
    the flat connectors, right?

    If you want to hook usb devices to it use a host port if you want to use it
    as a usb device use the other. All of the different types of usb connectors
    are functionally identical. Some are just smaller.

    Bob
     
    sycochkn, Mar 6, 2008
    #5
  6. Paul

    Paul Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > On Mar 5, 8:20�pm, Paul <> wrote:
    >> Paul wrote:
    >>> Hi,
    >>> � � � I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    >>> schematic:
    >>> http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_R...
    >>> � � � Look at page 21 and 22.
    >>> � � � If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    >>> be one of the "Host" ports, right? �Like i should delete the
    >>> other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    >>> they are "Clients", right?
    >>> � � �Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    >>> while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?

    >> Unzip the following package. It contains the USB 2.0 standard.
    >> Open usb_20.pdf and flip to the first page of Chapter 6. There,
    >> you'll see examples of upstream and downstream connectors.
    >> Your very own computer, uses the flat connector, so you can
    >> see an example in the I/O area on the back of your computer.
    >>
    >> http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_092407.zip
    >>
    >> If you want to be a USB designer, then reading these may
    >> help as well.
    >>
    >> http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/...opers/whitepapers/power_delivery_motherboards...
    >>
    >> � � Paul- Hide quoted text -
    >>
    >> - Show quoted text -

    >
    > Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    > want to be able to hook this one up correctly.
    >
    > So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    > it will have to be a "Host" port, right? And this will be using
    > the flat connectors, right?


    The purpose of the flat connector, is to help you plug the
    right kind of device into the connector. If this design is
    intended to be connected to USB peripherals, then the flat
    connector seems appropriate. But you should really
    read the USB specification, at least the section I
    pointed to. You need to understand the concept of upstream
    and downstream, and why the connectors are, what they are.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #6
  7. On 2008-03-06, Paul <> wrote:
    >
    > Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    > want to be able to hook this one up correctly.
    >
    > So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    > it will have to be a "Host" port, right? And this will be using
    > the flat connectors, right?


    Without wishing to denigrate your abilities, it sounds to me as if
    you are in way over your head. I strongly suspect you are wasting
    your time trying to implement whatever it is you want to accomplish.
    USB is _not_ a trivial thing to implement even for experienced
    engineers, and it seems to me that you are lacking knowledge I would
    expect even from a vaguely experienced end user.

    The two styles of connector are for different devices. You can't
    say that you need one or the other based on the fact you only need
    one. The two ends of a USB lead are not equivalent. The one
    nearest to the computer is essentially the one with all the control
    and is functionally as well as mechanically different to the one
    nearest the peripheral.

    The 'A' plug is the rectangular one with the contacts all on the
    same plane that plugs into either the computer itself or to a hub
    that is in turn connected to the computer (possibly through another
    hub). This is the 'upstream' connector as connections in that
    direction ultimately go in the direction of the computer. The 'B'
    plug is squarer, with two rows of contacts. These all point
    downstream, away from the computer and towards the peripherals.
    Again, this is not merely a mechanical difference - the two sockets
    reflect differences in the role each device expects to play in the
    USB connection, essentially whether it is acting as the computer
    or a peripheral.

    Which connector your device needs depends on what it is doing. If
    it is to be plugged into a computer and work as a peripheral it
    needs a 'B' socket. If it is to replace a computer and control a
    devices, whether it be a printer, flash drive, keyboard or whatever,
    it needs an 'A' socket.

    As I said in my opening paragraph, issues such as these suggest a
    complete lack of familiarity with USB. Take look at Wikipedia's
    page on USB. Like many Wikipedia pages, it's a mixed bag that
    mixes things end users should know with a few random engineering
    topics thrown in for no apparent reason, but you need to understand
    pretty much _everything_ on that page and much more besides to
    successfully implement USB.

    --
    Andrew Smallshaw
     
    Andrew Smallshaw, Mar 6, 2008
    #7
  8. Paul

    Paul Guest

    On Mar 6, 9:24 am, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    > On 2008-03-06, Paul <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >      Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    > > want to be able to hook this one up correctly.

    >
    > >      So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    > > it will have to be a "Host" port, right?  And this will be using
    > > the flat connectors, right?

    >
    > Without wishing to denigrate your abilities, it sounds to me as if
    > you are in way over your head.  I strongly suspect you are wasting
    > your time trying to implement whatever it is you want to accomplish.
    > USB is _not_ a trivial thing to implement even for experienced
    > engineers, and it seems to me that you are lacking knowledge I would
    > expect even from a vaguely experienced end user.
    >


    Errr....Maybe that's why I'm asking???!!

    I'm a total newbie on this subject, of course, but if you
    cannot be helpful without making yourself feel better by telling
    me how ignorant I am on this subject, then F*** Off!!




    > The two styles of connector are for different devices.  You can't
    > say that you need one or the other based on the fact you only need
    > one.  The two ends of a USB lead are not equivalent.  The one
    > nearest to the computer is essentially the one with all the control
    > and is functionally as well as mechanically different to the one
    > nearest the peripheral.  
    >
    > The 'A' plug is the rectangular one with the contacts all on the
    > same plane that plugs into either the computer itself or to a hub
    > that is in turn connected to the computer (possibly through another
    > hub).  This is the 'upstream' connector as connections in that
    > direction ultimately go in the direction of the computer.  The 'B'
    > plug is squarer, with two rows of contacts.  These all point
    > downstream, away from the computer and towards the peripherals.
    > Again, this is not merely a mechanical difference - the two sockets
    > reflect differences in the role each device expects to play in the
    > USB connection, essentially whether it is acting as the computer
    > or a peripheral.
    >
    > Which connector your device needs depends on what it is doing.  If
    > it is to be plugged into a computer and work as a peripheral it
    > needs a 'B' socket.  If it is to replace a computer and control a
    > devices, whether it be a printer, flash drive, keyboard or whatever,
    > it needs an 'A' socket.
    >
    > As I said in my opening paragraph, issues such as these suggest a
    > complete lack of familiarity with USB.  Take look at Wikipedia's
    > page on USB.  Like many Wikipedia pages, it's a mixed bag that
    > mixes things end users should know with a few random engineering
    > topics thrown in for no apparent reason, but you need to understand
    > pretty much _everything_ on that page and much more besides to
    > successfully implement USB.
    >


    B.S.!

    From a wiring perspective, it's only 4 wires, with 2 pull-up
    resistors. Can't be too difficult....
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #8
  9. Paul

    Paul Guest

    On Mar 6, 9:24 am, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    > On 2008-03-06, Paul <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >      Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    > > want to be able to hook this one up correctly.

    >
    > >      So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    > > it will have to be a "Host" port, right?  And this will be using
    > > the flat connectors, right?

    >
    > Without wishing to denigrate your abilities, it sounds to me as if
    > you are in way over your head.  I strongly suspect you are wasting
    > your time trying to implement whatever it is you want to accomplish.
    > USB is _not_ a trivial thing to implement even for experienced
    > engineers, and it seems to me that you are lacking knowledge I would
    > expect even from a vaguely experienced end user.
    >
    > The two styles of connector are for different devices.  You can't
    > say that you need one or the other based on the fact you only need
    > one.  The two ends of a USB lead are not equivalent.  The one
    > nearest to the computer is essentially the one with all the control
    > and is functionally as well as mechanically different to the one
    > nearest the peripheral.  
    >
    > The 'A' plug is the rectangular one with the contacts all on the
    > same plane that plugs into either the computer itself or to a hub
    > that is in turn connected to the computer (possibly through another
    > hub).  This is the 'upstream' connector as connections in that
    > direction ultimately go in the direction of the computer.  The 'B'
    > plug is squarer, with two rows of contacts.  These all point
    > downstream, away from the computer and towards the peripherals.
    > Again, this is not merely a mechanical difference - the two sockets
    > reflect differences in the role each device expects to play in the
    > USB connection, essentially whether it is acting as the computer
    > or a peripheral.
    >
    > Which connector your device needs depends on what it is doing.  If
    > it is to be plugged into a computer and work as a peripheral it
    > needs a 'B' socket.  If it is to replace a computer and control a
    > devices, whether it be a printer, flash drive, keyboard or whatever,
    > it needs an 'A' socket.
    >


    Again, more B. S.! The Type A and B connectors perform
    the same function, then are just different physically!

    Maybe your name is really Andrew Smallbrain.....
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #9
  10. Paul

    Paul Guest

    On Mar 5, 11:58 pm, "sycochkn" <> wrote:
    > "Paul" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    > On Mar 5, 8:20?pm, Paul <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > Paul wrote:
    > > > Hi,

    >
    > > > ? ? ? I'd like to modify the following Colibri Toradex Evaluation
    > > > schematic:

    >
    > > >http://www.toradex.com/downloads/Colibri_EvaluationBoard_Schematics_R....

    >
    > > > ? ? ? Look at page 21 and 22.

    >
    > > > ? ? ? If i only want to use 1 USB port, it will probably have to
    > > > be one of the "Host" ports, right? ?Like i should delete the
    > > > other ports (going to "USBC_N" and "USBC_P"), because
    > > > they are "Clients", right?

    >
    > > > ? ? ?Also, I noticed the Host USB ports are the flatter type,
    > > > while the Clients look to be the fatter ones....why is this?

    >
    > > Unzip the following package. It contains the USB 2.0 standard.
    > > Open usb_20.pdf and flip to the first page of Chapter 6. There,
    > > you'll see examples of upstream and downstream connectors.
    > > Your very own computer, uses the flat connector, so you can
    > > see an example in the I/O area on the back of your computer.

    >
    > >http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_092407.zip

    >
    > > If you want to be a USB designer, then reading these may
    > > help as well.

    >
    > >http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/hs_usb_pdg_r1_0.pdfhttp://www.usb........

    >
    > > ? ? Paul- Hide quoted text -

    >
    > > - Show quoted text -

    >
    >      Well, i don't really want to be a USB designer per se, i just
    > want to be able to hook this one up correctly.
    >
    >      So again, it looks like if i only want to have one USB port,
    > it will have to be a "Host" port, right?  And this will be using
    > the flat connectors, right?
    >
    > If you want to hook usb devices to it use a host port if you want to use it
    > as a usb device use the other. All of the different types of usb connectors
    > are functionally identical. Some are just smaller.
    >
    > Bob- Hide quoted text -
    >
    > - Show quoted text -



    Thanks Bob.

    Also, this microcontroller has the new "On-The-Go"
    standard, so i believe it can be either a peripheral device,
    or a host.

    So maybe we will really be both Host and Peripheral
    in this case.
     
    Paul, Mar 6, 2008
    #10
  11. Paul

    David Brown Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > On Mar 6, 9:24 am, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    >> On 2008-03-06, Paul <> wrote:

    <snip>
    > Again, more B. S.! The Type A and B connectors perform
    > the same function, then are just different physically!
    >
    > Maybe your name is really Andrew Smallbrain.....


    Well, I think that about wraps things up for this thread. Clearly, you
    know far more about USB than any of the experienced engineers in these
    groups. There is no point in people giving help and advice if that's
    all the thanks they get.
     
    David Brown, Mar 7, 2008
    #11
  12. On 2008-03-06, Paul <> wrote:
    > On Mar 6, 9:24 am, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Which connector your device needs depends on what it is doing.  If
    >> it is to be plugged into a computer and work as a peripheral it
    >> needs a 'B' socket.  If it is to replace a computer and control a
    >> devices, whether it be a printer, flash drive, keyboard or whatever,
    >> it needs an 'A' socket.

    >
    > Again, more B. S.! The Type A and B connectors perform
    > the same function, then are just different physically!


    If you already know all the answers why did you bother to post in
    the first instance? It appears to me that you are unwilling to
    make what should be a simple decision, i.e. should my device be a
    USB host or peripheral? This does not take much reasoning, it
    either is or should be a simple instinctive judgement based on what
    the device does.

    Don't think that going for On The Go as you have mentioned in
    another subthread simplifies things by avoiding the need to make
    a simple decision. It doubles complexity since your device is now
    both and you still have to determine which mode it should be in at
    any particular time. On The Go is only appropriate for a fairly
    narrow class of devices.

    Yes, as you mentioned in your first reply to my post, it is only
    four wires. That does not make things simpler but more complex.
    It means that you don't have separate wires on which to send and
    recive data. You don't have a wire that says that your particular
    device is the one currently being addressed. You don't have an
    interrupt request line so that your device can request the computer's
    attention. These are all handled by the USB _protocol_ which is
    much more complex to deal with than a 100 signal bus where everything
    has its own line. The hardware side of USB is one thing, but that
    is nothing without the _software_ that makes the whole thing work
    and where the real complexity is.

    My initial post pointed out that USB is not straightforward and
    politely pointed out that if you are lacking knowledge of the
    fundamentals then any project you attempt is unlikely to be
    successful, at least not without a thorough grounding in the basics
    first. I see that you have also apparently chosen to ignore
    reference to the standard and other documents that others have
    referred you to. This also does not bode well. Finally you hurl
    abuse at people who attempt to assist you simply becasue that
    assistance is not to your liking. This does not encourage others
    to help in future and further diminishes the probability of your
    success.

    Ultimately though, it does not affect me. I can and have developed
    USB peripherals, and vitriol such as yours will not alter that.
    You are still incapable of doing so. An attitude such as you have
    already displayed will ensure that you do not alter that either.

    --
    Andrew Smallshaw
     
    Andrew Smallshaw, Mar 7, 2008
    #12
  13. Paul

    Paul Guest

    On Mar 7, 1:50 pm, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    > On 2008-03-06, Paul <> wrote:
    >
    > > On Mar 6, 9:24 am, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:

    >
    > >> Which connector your device needs depends on what it is doing.  If
    > >> it is to be plugged into a computer and work as a peripheral it
    > >> needs a 'B' socket.  If it is to replace a computer and control a
    > >> devices, whether it be a printer, flash drive, keyboard or whatever,
    > >> it needs an 'A' socket.

    >
    > >       Again, more B. S.!    The Type A and B connectors perform
    > > the same function, then are just different physically!

    >
    > If you already know all the answers why did you bother to post in
    > the first instance?  It appears to me that you are unwilling to
    > make what should be a simple decision, i.e. should my device be a
    > USB host or peripheral?  This does not take much reasoning, it
    > either is or should be a simple instinctive judgement based on what
    > the device does.
    >


    If it's clear that I'm absolutely a newbie to USB,
    why keep telling me how ignorant i am? Oh, to boost your
    sagging self-image at work?

    The devices are gonna be Hosts. As in, they should control
    peripheral
    devices like a mouse, keyboard, printer, memory stick. etc....

    However, it would be nice to be able to transfer data from
    one Host to another, which appears to be impossible (no one
    connects one computer to another to transfer data). So maybe the
    OTG would be the correct choice, also because of the 480Mbps data
    rate.


    > Don't think that going for On The Go as you have mentioned in
    > another subthread simplifies things by avoiding the need to make
    > a simple decision.  It doubles complexity since your device is now
    > both and you still have to determine which mode it should be in at
    > any particular time.  On The Go is only appropriate for a fairly
    > narrow class of devices.
    >
    > Yes, as you mentioned in your first reply to my post, it is only
    > four wires.  That does not make things simpler but more complex.
    > It means that you don't have separate wires on which to send and
    > recive data.  You don't have a wire that says that your particular
    > device is the one currently being addressed.  You don't have an
    > interrupt request line so that your device can request the computer's
    > attention.  These are all handled by the USB _protocol_ which is
    > much more complex to deal with than a 100 signal bus where everything
    > has its own line.  The hardware side of USB is one thing, but that
    > is nothing without the _software_ that makes the whole thing work
    > and where the real complexity is.
    >


    Dude! I only want to hook up the hardware! I'm not a
    programmer at all!

    Why are you making a simple question so difficult?


    > My initial post pointed out that USB is not straightforward and
    > politely pointed out that if you are lacking knowledge of the
    > fundamentals then any project you attempt is unlikely to be
    > successful, at least not without a thorough grounding in the basics
    > first.  I see that you have also apparently chosen to ignore
    > reference to the standard and other documents that others have
    > referred you to.  This also does not bode well.  Finally you hurl
    > abuse at people who attempt to assist you simply becasue that
    > assistance is not to your liking.  This does not encourage others
    > to help in future and further diminishes the probability of your
    > success.
    >
    > Ultimately though, it does not affect me.  I can and have developed
    > USB peripherals, and vitriol such as yours will not alter that.
    > You are still incapable of doing so.  An attitude such as you have
    > already displayed will ensure that you do not alter that either.
    >


    If you think i'm gonna kiss your ass just to get
    help, you are sorely mistaken, SmallBrain.

    Try getting off your high-horse, and maybe people
    will be more open and receptive to your advice.....
     
    Paul, Mar 7, 2008
    #13
  14. Paul

    Joel Koltner Guest

    "Paul" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    On Mar 7, 1:50 pm, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    " However, it would be nice to be able to transfer data from
    one Host to another, which appears to be impossible (no one
    connects one computer to another to transfer data)."

    They make "USB data transfer cables" for this very purpose; inside the cable
    are two USB clients that share some SRAM or similar. You're correct that it's
    impossible to transfer data between two USB hosts with "just a cable" --
    unless both hosts support USB on-the-go, that is.

    "Dude! I only want to hook up the hardware! I'm not a
    programmer at all!"

    Good hardware designs take the software into consideration -- some of the best
    hardware design I've done is when I did both the software AND the hardware,
    because you'll think you've designed the hardware well, but as you're sitting
    there doing the software you'll find some really annoying behavior due to that
    hardware's design... but happily you've still got the "out" to go and fix it.

    I wonder if anyone's collected anecdotes of hardware that -- from software's
    point of view -- was poorly designing; it'd probably make for entertaining
    reading!
     
    Joel Koltner, Mar 8, 2008
    #14
  15. Paul

    Paul Guest

    On Mar 7, 5:46 pm, "Joel Koltner" <> wrote:
    > "Paul" <> wrote in message
    >
    > news:...
    > On Mar 7, 1:50 pm, Andrew Smallshaw <> wrote:
    > "        However, it would be nice to be able to transfer data from
    > one Host to another, which appears to be impossible (no one
    > connects one computer to another to transfer data)."
    >
    > They make "USB data transfer cables" for this very purpose; inside the cable
    > are two USB clients that share some SRAM or similar.  You're correct that it's
    > impossible to transfer data between two USB hosts with "just a cable" --  
    > unless both hosts support USB on-the-go, that is.
    >


    So maybe one day, all computers will have OTG USB, so
    that we won't need memory sticks to transfer huge datafiles from
    harddrive to harddrive.


    > "Dude!  I only want to hook up the hardware!  I'm not a
    > programmer at all!"
    >
    > Good hardware designs take the software into consideration -- some of the best
    > hardware design I've done is when I did both the software AND the hardware,
    > because you'll think you've designed the hardware well, but as you're sitting
    > there doing the software you'll find some really annoying behavior due to that
    > hardware's design... but happily you've still got the "out" to go and fix it.
    >
    > I wonder if anyone's collected anecdotes of hardware that -- from software's
    > point of view -- was poorly designing; it'd probably make for entertaining
    > reading!


    Of course, you have a major point. But if i'm just gonna
    have a host port, it's really only D+, D-, and +5V and Ground.

    OTG USB looks a bit more complicated. See Figure 5 here:

    http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/1822/


    OTG requires switchable pull-up and pull-down resistors, a
    switchable
    +5V power supply, and an ID pin. This looks way more complicated,
    and
    will take up a lot of real estate.

    I'm leaning towards a simple Host USB port, using one of
    these:

    http://www.alliedelec.com/Images/Products/Datasheets/BM/TYCO-ELECTRONICS/3741829.pdf


    I don't think we will need to move data from unit to unit.
    Just support
    for memory sticks, keyboards, mouse, and maybe printers.

    Thanks, Joel.
     
    Paul, Mar 8, 2008
    #15
  16. Paul

    CBFalconer Guest

    Joel Koltner wrote:
    >

    .... snip ...
    >
    > Good hardware designs take the software into consideration --
    > some of the best hardware design I've done is when I did both
    > the software AND the hardware, because you'll think you've
    > designed the hardware well, but as you're sitting there doing
    > the software you'll find some really annoying behavior due to
    > that hardware's design... but happily you've still got the
    > "out" to go and fix it.
    >
    > I wonder if anyone's collected anecdotes of hardware that --
    > from software's point of view -- was poorly designing; it'd
    > probably make for entertaining reading!


    The reverse also applies. Quite a few years ago I had to interface
    a pre-existing LAN system to my brand new embedded systems. I
    designed a comprehensive interface, stage by stage, with removable
    internal test drivers. We built the first one, and it worked
    fine. Then we tried to build a second one, and lay artwork. Woops
    - things were too complex. Without the stage by stage assembly we
    just couldn't untangle the faults in finite time. So I redesigned
    completely, needing much more supervision from the CPU, and wrote
    the appropriate software. Everything worked, and we could build
    quite a few of them without any difficulties. The (interrupt
    driven) software load was trivial.

    The critical thing is to have both the software and hardware under
    your control. Then you can select an optimum, or nearly so, set of
    trade-offs. It helps to be good in both fields.

    --
    [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
    [page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
    Try the download section.



    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
     
    CBFalconer, Mar 8, 2008
    #16
  17. Paul

    aubrey Guest

    On Mar 5, 10:20 pm, Paul <> wrote:
    > Paul wrote:
    > > Hi,

    >


    >
    > Unzip the following package. It contains the USB 2.0 standard.
    > Open usb_20.pdf and flip to the first page of Chapter 6. There,
    > you'll see examples of upstream and downstream connectors.
    > Your very own computer, uses the flat connector, so you can
    > see an example in the I/O area on the back of your computer.
    >
    > http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/usb_20_092407.zip
    >
    > If you want to be a USB designer, then reading these may
    > help as well.
    >
    > http://www.usb.org/developers/docs/...opers/whitepapers/power_delivery_motherboards...
    >
    > Paul



    Thanks for posting these. I trimmed alt.computer. I have read until
    saturation this weekend, so now I am full of more questions.

    I have a PIC32 Starter Kit. I've exercised the LEDs and pushbuttons
    and want to move on. Any day now the postman should bring my PIC32
    fanout board from Olimex.

    My proposal is a USB 2.0 host controller expansion board. This should
    give me access to keyboard, later WiFi, and thence everything. Also,
    the PIC32 is new and this particular expansion board should be
    received well by the PIC32 community. Perhaps it will also have an
    upstream facing port with a PIC18F4550. This is a daunting project,
    but it seems like the one that is needed.

    AfterGoogle, I went to Mouser and focused on the Host controllers that
    they had in stock. :) I have done a mock up schematic and board in
    EAGLE using the NEC uPD720102EC-YEB. This is a straightforward
    reproduction of the schematics from the NEC datasheet, S17998E. By
    mock up I mean that I have placed "capacitors," and such, but without
    referring to a catalog and specific mfr and dimension information.
    That will be a subsequent "design for prototype" pass. At this time,
    I have not connected the programming ports and the PIC32. The many
    VDD levels, both on the PIC and the NEC are not managed. It is little
    more than a napkin doodle.

    I read Paul's post and read once through the power delivery
    whitepaper. I've added 470pF across pins 1,4 on each USB receptacle.
    I added a 360uF across the +USB and gnd traces near the downstream
    facing ports.

    What I don't see in reference schematics is any attention to fuses. I
    figure the same concerns on fuses and overcurrent exist in both Host
    and Hub designs, and I am looking at the ATmel AT43301 datasheet,
    doc1137.pdf (secured, no NDA). Figure 2.2 (Self-powered Hub) shows
    a switch connected to the AT43301, but no fuse. They do have a
    MIC2525-2 in their figure 5-2. Does the MIC2525-2 have the right
    stuff to be used instead of a fuse?

    The white paper mentions the polycrystalline resistor/fuse. I know
    that Mouser had them a few years ago. I remember thinking they were
    interesting. Are these used in designs today?

    If you happen to have EAGLE, you can view a snapshot at
    http://home.grandecom.net/~aubrey/aubrey/PIC/USB_host.brd Sorry, but
    I haven't installed a pdf printer, and my board house doesn't require
    Gerbers. Perhaps someone else has both EAGLE and Acrobat.

    I'd like to do this right. By that, I mean a design that is
    satisfying and could receive the logo. I assume the process is to
    make a working prototype, then job it out for "design for
    manufacture" I assume that the logo goes on a specific model and
    revision of a design. I was hoping to make a design element that was
    known to qualify and then just put it on the web.

    Questions follow from this. I assume the cost is at least k$10 to do
    this before the enclosure is considered. Can anyone give an actual
    total cost (electrical and mechanical separated) for a 1st unit with a
    logo for, say, an ordinary 4 port hub?

    If this is an expansion board and the power is from the mother board,
    what is the implication on the certification process (I haven't done
    my reading here) If it is an intelligent hub with the power from an
    upstream port, a PIC32 (MIPS processor) in the middle, the Host facing
    downstream, the PIC32 powered from the upstream USB but detachable,
    can the total assembly receive certification?

    Actually, I don't see a USB logo on the PIC32 Starter Kit. Maybe this
    is a non issue.
     
    aubrey, Mar 10, 2008
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. H. Brinkman
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    580
    H. Brinkman
    Aug 8, 2003
  2. Fred

    Olympus C-700 Service Manual or Schematic?

    Fred, Jul 24, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    93
    Views:
    6,051
    mrsschmitz
    Nov 26, 2009
  3. Ronald Murray

    HP Laptop Schematic

    Ronald Murray, Oct 18, 2006, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    662
    Ronald Murray
    Oct 18, 2006
  4. hotmomma

    need schematic manual for sony vaio motherboard

    hotmomma, Oct 8, 2007, in forum: General Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,923
    hotmomma
    Oct 8, 2007
  5. Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo

    Re: Mozilla versus IE versus Opera versus Safari

    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo, May 8, 2008, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    895
    Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
    May 8, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page