Jump to content

Talk:AVR microcontrollers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Atmel AVR)

Archiving Discussions

[edit]

I've archived the discussion page - it was getting quite long - also there are no currently active discussions so now seemed a good time. -- Rehnn83 Talk 11:33, 19 March 2007 (UTC) asdasd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.196.243.156 (talk) 13:34, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brief history

[edit]

It is believed the AVR basic architecture was conceived by two students at the Norwegian Institute of Technology (NTH) Alf-Egil Bogen and Vegard Wollan.[1]

I tought this to be true, why is it only "believed"? Is this very hard to confirm somehow? --85.165.225.33 16:41, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also thought it was true - I will try and find a reference to back this up. -- Rehnn83 Talk 07:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone devise a timeline for the AVR devices? I.e. when the first AVR was commercially available (and which one was it), when the Mega series started to come out (I think it was 2000), Tiny series, etc. Would be useful to give some perspective on how long the AVR has been around. Dave 18:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, I'm interested in seeing a timeline as well, and thought I might be able to help. I have been a long time AVR user, since 1999 or so. I have an Atmel databook dated May 1997, which includes the 1200, 2313, 4414, and 8515. So they were commercially available at least then. However, I don't know if that's a reliable-enough source, "Pfagerburg has a book in his basement that says so." What do you think?
I can piece together a lot of the early chips (2323 and 4433 with ADC's, 2343 8-pinner, Mega103 and Mega603, Tiny's all came after the M103/M603, etc.) from memory, but not with good dates, and again, memory doesn't exactly meet WP:RS. I tried googling for "history of Atmel AVR" and didn't get anything useful.
I have a few contacts at Atmel that I might be able to ask about the history and a timeline, if that works for a source. Any ideas? --Pfagerburg 02:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You know what might be really neat is a history-slash-derivation tree, kind of like you see for all the revisions of Unix and unix-like systems. Show the first four chips, then the 2323 coming from the 2313, the 4433 coming from the 4414, etc. As the mega's and tiny's show up, new entries are added, some linking way back (tiny2313 to the 2313, mega8515 to the 8515, etc.). But of course we need the data first. --Pfagerburg 02:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Several of the links are now essentially dead; e.g. pointing to either a squatter domain or a front-page at the new corporate owner instead of the supposedly linked pdf. They wayback machine might still work, if someone is sufficiently motivated. JimJJewett (talk) 17:14, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the time it took for you to write your comment, I fixed the 2nd reference. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 06:41, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Atmel avr logo.png

[edit]

Image:Atmel avr logo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:17, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the image from the main article, until such time as it can be uploaded with a fair-use justification. Pfagerburg 05:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sometime in the last three years it was added back. I just wrote up a non-free-use rationale (my forst one, so feel free to educate me if it is wrong). 76.233.179.195 (talk) 22:04, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing PRESTO

[edit]

Smishek, I removed your edits for AVR PRESTO. There are many (tens, perhaps even 100) third-party programmers available for the AVR; giving each one a section would make the article overly long. And surely there are more popular programmers to list before the PRESTO, such as Kanda or the build-your-own parallel port bit-banger used by uisp and many other open-source programs. It should be sufficient to point to an all-encompassing website like avrfreaks to get a complete list of third-party tools, rather than promoting one or more of them specifically. Pfagerburg 05:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The link to Wikibooks "Embedded Systems" is dead, for in Wikibooks the chapters in the Book "Embedded Systems" use slash as delimiters, whereas the template uses colon as default, that results in the broken link "Embedded Systems:Atmel_AVR" instead of "Embedded_Systems/Atmel_AVR". I am not sure if one should correct the template or the link. Alaudo 11:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per Template_talk:Wikibookspar#New_template_syntax_confusion, I left the middle field blank. Yes, it's gronky. But it's fixed now. Pfagerburg 15:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've created an account on Wikibooks (same account name as here) and will be addressing the Embedded Systems/Atmel AVR section. [1] Pfagerburg 17:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WinAVR

[edit]

A section dedicated to WinAVR seems appropriate. It is a GCC based C compiler for the AVR series, and is most likely the second most common language used on the AVR series besides AVR asm.

Scubanarc (talk) 04:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

In the "External Links" section, this comment is embedded in the wiki source: [2]

DO NOT ADD MORE LINKS TO THIS ARTICLE. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A COLLECTION OF
LINKS. If you think that your link might be useful, do not add it here,
but put it on this article's discussion page first or submit your link
to the appropriate category at the Open Directory Project (www.dmoz.org)
and link back to that category using the {{dmoz}} template.

I removed two links that were added after this warning, and were not discussed here on the talk page. Same rationale as my comments on PRESTO above, I don't think these are notable enough to be included in the article. Pfagerburg (talk) 19:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another link removed today for the same reasons. Please discuss these links here before adding (or re-adding) them. Pfagerburg (talk) 19:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this forum site http://www.electro-tech-online.com/avr/ would be a valuable link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.243.71 (talk) 12:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing the link here first, per the "No More Links" notice. I appreciate your efforts to contribute useful information to this article. I did take a quick look at the site, and I'm interested in your reasons for why that link would be appropriate for the main article. Pfagerburg (talk) 03:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Alot of people looking at AVR will also want a place to get help resolving technical programming issues. The Electro Tech AVR forum is a great place for just that, new comers can search through an archive of problems already solved, and can also interact with experts. Electro Tech has many AVR experts and I think that is why a link would be a valuable link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.243.71 (talk) 02:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I looked at the site in more detail, and it seems to be a very helpful message board. I saw a few threads where more experienced users were helping newbies sort through the various settings for the ADC, for example.
However, I don't think that Electro Tech merits inclusion in the main article for two reasons: notability, and duplication of resources. AVRFreaks, for example, fits both criteria. It is very well-known, to the point that Atmel points people to that site at their official seminars. AVRFreaks has a message board that is frequented by helpful experts, but they also have articles, HOWTO's, downloadable application notes, etc., essentially a very large superset of the Electro Tech message board.
I think your link would be well-suited for submission to the Open Directory Project, and then it's only one extra click away from this article. Pfagerburg (talk) 03:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, this isn't my article, and I didn't even write (or re-write) most of the content. I didn't add the NoMoreLinks notice, either. If other interested editors feel that the Electro Tech forums merit a link in the main article, then it probably belongs there. But since no-one else has contributed an opinion on this matter yet, we're left with a committee of two to figure it out. I invite anyone else who is interested in this article to comment on this link's inclusion or lack thereof. Pfagerburg (talk) 03:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really getting tired of the "no link" tyrants getting delete happy on Wikipedia. Though Wikipedia is NOT suppose to be a LINK FARM, it doesn't mean that an article can't have high quality links in it. People come to Wikipedia as a first-stop place to learn about a subject, then as a next step use links to external references. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RTOS List

[edit]

I removed a list of kernels that are available for the AVR. Some of the links went to disambiguation pages, or an incorrect page, while others did not exist.

There was no context given for the list, no explanation or introduction, and it was in a section where it didn't fit: the rest of the section was devoted almost entirely to Atmel-produced tools for development. This section, had it existed during the Great No More Links Purge of the Atmel AVR Article would likely have been removed as well. The list exists in a different form on the AVRFreaks.net website already, and this article links there already. Pfagerburg (talk) 19:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should I add an external link to this article of Atmel AVR? this link is a nice tutorial on AVR microcontroller & may be good reference for the readers who looking for AVR architecture & pinout. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.196.226.27 (talk) 07:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AVR and the C Language

[edit]

I removed the statement from the article that the AVR has only one address space, which removes the need for C language extensions. This isn't strictly true; the AVR has three address spaces: code, data, and EEPROM, although the EEPROM is a little bit of a stretch. While the data space is not broken up like IRAM and XRAM on the 8051, or into pages like the PIC, it is separate from the code space. C compilers for the AVR use a variety of extensions to specify that constant data is stored in program memmory and must be accessed with LPM instructions, or that data is actually stored in EEPROM instead of SRAM.

For example, in AVRGCC, to store constant data in program memory, use the __attribute__ decorator to put it in the __progmem__ section: 

const unsigned char foo[] __attribute__((__progmem__)) = { 0x00, 0x01, ... };

Functions that take pointers must specify if the pointers are to data, or to program memory, and so AVRGCC has variants of standard library functions, like strcpy which accesses SRAM pointers, and strcpy_P which accesses code memory pointers.

Or in the IAR C compiler, data can be stored in EEPROM using a special declaration syntax 

uint8_t __eeprom foo;
uint8_t bar;

void foobar( void )
{
    foo = 3;
    bar = 20;
}

The compiler will generate the appropriate code to access the EEPROM byte when foo is used in an expression, but will use regular SRAM accesses when bar is used in an expression. Pfagerburg (talk) 05:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

In the Basic Families section, there are links for the various families, TinyAVR, MegaAVR, XMEGA, etc. All of these but MegaAVR are red links, meaning there is no article. The MegaAVR link redirects back into this same article. Is there any value to have sub-articles about the AVR variants? Pfagerburg (talk) 05:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, they are similar enough that separate subaticles would have a lot of duplication. An exception would be the AVR32, which isn't all that similar. 76.233.179.195 (talk) 22:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please add "Programming interfaces" and "Debugging interfaces" sections

[edit]

Since AVR chips have evolved over the years, including evolution of programming and debugging interfaces, I think it's important that 2 new sections be added to this article: "Programming interfaces" and "Debugging interfaces". These sections should list all interface types and which AVR families are supported by each interface type, and possibly summary tables. The sections should avoid becoming a part number farm. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 00:42, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I copied sections from a book at the Wikipedia sister project http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Embedded_Systems/Atmel_AVR Since it also has the same Creative Commons license as Wikipedia, then I assume it shouldn't be a problem to copy it. It give us a quick way to get these sections up and going, and now people can refine them to make them more unique. I've already added a photo to the programming section, and fix a few things. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 06:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please add "old devices" section

[edit]

There does not seem to be any mention of the "AT90S" series processors (Aside from the tangential reference in relation to the first AVR), and how they differ (if they do?) from the newer ATtiny range. I came here to find that out (as I found an unused one in my parts bin!) and have been disappointed! Perhaps someone who knows could expand the Brief History and Device Overview to mention the older devices? 193.63.239.14 (talk) 13:12, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Atmega8 Development Board.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Atmega8 Development Board.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Atmega8 Development Board.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:45, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Atmel AVR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:17, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atmel AVR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atmel AVR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Talk removal proposal.

[edit]

The sections on programmers and eval boards makes this into a sales pamphlet, instead of an encyclopedia article.

I propose removing them.

HacksawPC (talk) 06:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Atmel AVR

[edit]

Since Atmel was acquired by Microchip in 2016, the title of the article should probably be revised since it is now misleading. Some proposals:

  • AVR and renaming the current article of that name to AVR (disambiguation)
  • AVR (microcontroller)
  • AVR (microcontroller family)
  • Microchip AVR

My vote would be for the first of these. The current AVR disambiguation article has pretty much zero links, so AVR being the article for the microcontroller seems the most relevant. -- Egil (talk) 04:00, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Answered in section below. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:28, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 July 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Clearly no consensus at this time that AVR microcontrollers are the primary topic for AVR. (non-admin closure) — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 18:37, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Atmel AVR → AVR – Since Atmel was acquired by Microchip in 2016, the title of the article is now misleading. The current AVR disambiguation article has pretty much zero links, so AVR being the article for the microcontroller seems the most relevant. The current AVR article should be renamed to AVR (disambiguation) Egil (talk) 04:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:57, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

To save some time and address the original concern that this stuff is not Atmel anymore, I WP:BOLDly moved this page to AVR microcontrollers, picking up a reasonable WP:NATURAL title. Should anyone object, please open a requested move and hope for a broader community input. No such user (talk) 08:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

abbrev.

[edit]

Many webpages mention Advanced Virtual Risc for the meaning of AVR (haven't found any, though, that seems credible). I'm not sure what the "virtual" would mean here... Hoemaco (talk) 12:43, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Current Programmers/Debuggers are missing in "Development tools and evaluation kits"

[edit]

The mentioned tools are legacy/EOL while all current tools (MPLAB Snap, MPLAB PICkit 4, MPLAB ICE 4 and Atmel-ICE) are missing from that section. Source for current official Microchip tools is here: https://www.microchip.com/en-us/tools-resources/debug/programmers-debuggers 31.19.244.251 (talk) 19:11, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"ASIC house"

[edit]

The "History" part of the article uses the phrase "ASIC house". Can you please explain it to me or replace it with something that is easier to understand? Janhrach (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Release year

[edit]

The tables in "Device overview" are stating that the release year of the ATmega and the ATtiny series is 2016. But these series are much older, the first ATtiny was introduced before 2000. Can you find the correct dates? Does "Release year" mean the year when the first chip from the series was introduced? Janhrach (talk) 13:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed – see [3] Janhrach (talk) 12:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:AVR_microcontrollers&oldid=1197164058"