Tip / Sign in to post questions, reply, level up, and achieve exciting badges. Know more

PSoC™ 6 Forum Discussions

Chva_1477726
Level 4
Level 4
10 sign-ins First solution authored 25 replies posted

I have used PSoC Creator for several years love it. I wanted to switch to the CY8C6244 family MCU's which DO NOT HAVE connectivity (BLE/WiFi) but found that I can no longer use PSoC Creator for developing on these.

So I installed Useless Toolbox, sorry, Modus Toolbox and wanted to start a new application, only to find out that I can only pick Kits, not devices. No problem, just look at the manual and community form to see how I can pick a chip I thought.

The manual state you can change the device in the Device Configurator under the File dropdown if you picked a kit. So, select file, only to find out there is no device option.

A Cypress/Infineon employee created a KB article that state, create App,  select PSoC6 generic, then pick a blank app, just to find again that that option is no longer in existence.

It looks like Infineon is trying its absolute best to discourage developers to use their products, and they have succeeded with me.

Other companies, also using the Eclipse framework, have actually succeeded to assist developers in developing solutions for the world, rather that try to pick a MCU and find out you have to create your own board support package, navigating conflicting documentation AND GIVING UP IN THE END AS IT IS WASTING TOO MUCH TIME.

Modus Toolbox is a total waste of valuable development time!!!!

What I cannot do on a PSoC5LP, will now be done on a competitor MCU, I HAVE HAD ENOUGH!!!!!

 

0 Likes
1 Solution
Len_CONSULTRON
Level 9
Level 9
500 solutions authored 1000 replies posted 750 replies posted

Chva,

I understand your frustration.  I'm a fan of PSoC Creator too.   Migrating to ModusToolBox has been a challenge for me too.

The issue is that the CY8C6244 family has no UDBs.   Because of this, Infineon has elected to not include this family of parts into PSoC Creator.   However some of the other PSoC62 parts have UDBs and are buildable under PSoC Creator.

Here's a list of parts:

  • CY8C6247BFI-D54
  • CY8C6247BZI-AUD54
  • CY8C6247BZI-D34
  • CY8C6247BZI-D54
  • CY8C6247FDI-D32
  • CY8C6247FDI-D52
  • CY8C6247FTI-D52
  • CY8C6247WI-D54

I realize you're not a fan of MTB.  However, there is a KBA about how to create your own BSP which I believe should accomplish configuring your own custom build.   Creating-Custom-BSPs-in-ModusToolbox-KBA230822 

Len
"Engineering is an Art. The Art of Compromise."

View solution in original post

0 Likes
4 Replies
Len_CONSULTRON
Level 9
Level 9
500 solutions authored 1000 replies posted 750 replies posted

Chva,

I understand your frustration.  I'm a fan of PSoC Creator too.   Migrating to ModusToolBox has been a challenge for me too.

The issue is that the CY8C6244 family has no UDBs.   Because of this, Infineon has elected to not include this family of parts into PSoC Creator.   However some of the other PSoC62 parts have UDBs and are buildable under PSoC Creator.

Here's a list of parts:

  • CY8C6247BFI-D54
  • CY8C6247BZI-AUD54
  • CY8C6247BZI-D34
  • CY8C6247BZI-D54
  • CY8C6247FDI-D32
  • CY8C6247FDI-D52
  • CY8C6247FTI-D52
  • CY8C6247WI-D54

I realize you're not a fan of MTB.  However, there is a KBA about how to create your own BSP which I believe should accomplish configuring your own custom build.   Creating-Custom-BSPs-in-ModusToolbox-KBA230822 

Len
"Engineering is an Art. The Art of Compromise."
0 Likes

Hi Len

I have actaully used some of the listed MCU's in projects using PSoC Creator and all goes well until you want to use the USB subsystem as Host, then you have to switch to Modus Toolbox.

The whole argument that PSoC creator is used for devices with UDB's, do not really hold water. I have developed a few projects using the FM0+ family of Arm processors which have no UDB's using PSoC Creator.

My main issue with Modus is the fact that you cannot start a new project just by picking a MCU, include its PDL and start your development. You first have to pick a similar board, go through the effort to modify the MCU, disable all the enabled hardware components and then only can you hope to start.

The documentation is also several versions behind the actual software, which on some topics also give you the incorrect information.

I am just wondering why Infineon does not do what other manufacturers do and actually try to make development on their products easier for developers. (Like PSoC Creator)

Regards

Chris

Chris,

You are correct.  The presence or lack of UDBs is not the reason for allowing the device to be included for design in PSoC Creator.  I counted 26 PSoC6 devices that had no UDBs and were designable in Creator.

When speaking to Infineon employees and some written references in these forum, indicate that MTB is the tool going forward.  PsoC Creator has no current plans to be expanded.

There are probably multiple reasons for this decision.  One reason may be that Infineon elected not to include component equivalents for the WiFi devices being included on some of their Kits. 

I am a fan of Creator's TopDesign schematic entry routing and UDB design.  This is much more intuitive to me.

MTB's 'checkbox' and 'dropdown' configuration method is not bad to set features.  This method is also used for configuring components in Creator.  

The sad part is that MTB uses the 'dropdown' method to route to or from other resources such as a limited set of GPIO pins, clock sources, other resource inputs, etc.    I find the visual schematic routing method of Creator far more superior and intuitive.

One last gripe:   I'm also a BIG fan of UDBs.   I routinely use UDBs to create HW state machines to make my design as CPU efficient and optimize performance.

Infineon has indicated that they may include a UDB creation tool in a future version of MTB.  We'll see.  Right now, there is no official method to load UDB configuration parameters into the device that has UDBs from MTB.  Therefore those valuable resources are paid for but not accessable.

A fellow PSoC enthusiast, , has created a tool to move a UDB designed in Creator to MTB.  Here's a link to that forum discussion:  How-do-I-create-a-custom-UDB-solution-in-the-Modus-toolbox 

Note: You can only use this capability with PSoC6's that have UDBs and you must design the UDBs in Creator.  This means that the specific PSoC6 part you are using is already supported in Creator.   If not it won't be easy.

In general, Rolf's tool takes a UDB design after a successful "Application Build" phase and extracts the PSoC register settings from it.  This includes the clocking and digital routing fabric.   

Since all this information is normally loaded into registers before main() under Creator, he has installable code to be inserted into MTB code as the first thing when running main() code.  

I have created a couple of simple examples for myself using this tool and it works.   Since this is an unofficial tool, there are no design-time validation checks. Using UDBs in this manner lends itself to 'static' resource configuration.  

It is possible with dynamic run-time configuration methods like PDL an HAL layers available on MTB that whatever UDBs you configure using this tool that they may be made useless (at best).   

I believe Rolf's tool is a great attempt to fill in a feature lacking with MTB.

Len
"Engineering is an Art. The Art of Compromise."
0 Likes
tlaritz
Level 1
Level 1
First reply posted First question asked Welcome!

Using the WiFI on the CY8CKIT_062 with BLE and WiFi forces one down the path of using WICED vs Creator.  But, later versions of WICED do not support the CY8CKIT_062 (which has the CY8C6247BZI-D54).  So, if you want to use the WiFi of the kit, you are again forced down the Modus Toolbox path.  It does seem like a sad state of affairs, picking a product only to find that it has limited support.

0 Likes