[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Paparazzi-devel] New uC Target with FPU?

From: antoine drouin
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] New uC Target with FPU?
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2010 10:48:25 +0200

Dear Mark

This is the board I used for the early developments of Lisa. There's a
"board file" for it in the svn (
conf/autopilot/boards/olimex_stm32-h103.h ) and a linker script for
the MCU  (  sw/airborne/stm32/stm32f103rb_flash.ld )



On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:42 AM,  <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Chris & Antoine,
> Thanks for your replies/comments.
> Yes, I agree that it's better to spend efforts on something more
> advanced such as the STM32.
> I'll order an Olimex STM32-H103 board and play around with it (I have
> successfully modified the Olimex LPC-H2148 board to look like a Tiny
> v2).
> Cheers, Mark
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Chris
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 July 2010 6:42 PM
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: [Paparazzi-devel] Reply to:"RE: New ?C Target with
> FPU?(address@hidden)"
> Hi.
> I don't know much about Ardupilot but from what i have read so far about
> it
> it doesn't even come close to Paparazzi.
> The Paparazzi autopilot (twog or tiny) works every time and it is very
> dependable
> for long flights from my experience.
> I do program a lot for AVR and i can't see how an AVR cpu can be
> compared to an ARM one.
> The power of AVR cpu is significantly less than the ARM one and floating
> point math would
> overload it i think.
> The STM32 really has everything that is needed for an advanced autopilot
> and that is the way
> the tiny or twog should evolve i think.
> Only my opinion.
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]