No child items are currently assigned. Use child items to break down this issue into smaller parts.
Link issues together to show that they're related. Learn more.
Activity
- Developer
Is this related to AFCv3.1 and FINs?
- Author
This is related rather to JTAG headers
- Developer
For v4.0 we're planning to remove CON1 (due to #4 (closed)) and DNP JP1 as default use-case scenario would assume using JP2 for MMC programming and debugging.
JTAG connector is not technically violating FMC Rule 3.18, however, it won't be usable with FMC extending to region 3. Unfortunatly, it seems there is no better place for this connector.
- Mikolaj Sowinski changed milestone to %AFC v4.0
changed milestone to %AFC v4.0
- Mikolaj Sowinski assigned to @msowinski
assigned to @msowinski
- Mikolaj Sowinski assigned to @tprzywoz and unassigned @msowinski
assigned to @tprzywoz and unassigned @msowinski
- Developer
Here we had 3 connectors:
- CON1 which we removed because of removing atmega.
- J6 "SYSTEM" JTAG - we want to keep here that connector. It takes up a lot of space on PCB so changing its position would cause a chain reaction of moving the rest of the components. It can be easily used with single FMC and RTM. In the case of double FMC, it is now a possibility to use USB JTAG.
- JP1 MMC JTAG - Here we have a question. We would like to change that connector to pitch 1.27mm, which we use in our other projects. In addition, it would be easier to move it to another place where would be no mechanical conflict with the FMC. Would that be a problem for you?
- Developer
@henrique.silva @danielot Can you give your opinion on 1.27mm pitch in JP1?
- Tomasz Przywózki mentioned in issue #114 (closed)
mentioned in issue #114 (closed)
- Developer
Discussion moved to #114 (closed).
- Mikolaj Sowinski closed
closed