Jump to content

Getting started: Best BSP?

Recommended Posts



Getting along merrily with the Launchpad (EXP430F5529LP) - love the MSP430....


Wanting to do stuff properly, I'd like to use a BSP - I'm using the free version of CCS at the moment...


Which is the "best" BSP? (contentious question!) - I'll be building fairly large apps and targeting several chips (not decided which yet)...


Currently I seem to have 2 choices: BSP430 (http://pabigot.github.io/bsp430/index.html) or the one lurking in the TI SimpliciTi BSP folders and which has some porting instructions in their Wiki (http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/MSP430_SimpliciTI_Porting_Guidelines)...


I'd appreciate comments from those far more in the know...



Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't used Peter's BSP myself, but if his work with GCC and his general knowledge of these platforms is any foresight I bet it's a fine piece of software. You'll also have the benefit of Github for bug tracking/etc that I doubt TI provides with their software.


Sent from my Galaxy Note II with Tapatalk 4



Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the one hidden in the SimpliciTI stuff is MSP430Ware.  I'd start there instead of trying to pull it out of individual releases of example programs.


BSP430 supports the last (and latest, but beware: last) mspgcc release and CCS5.  It'll probably be updated for CCS6 (if that's out) in the next couple weeks as I do some more MSP430 work.  I have a patch for msp430-gcc (RH's version) which I'll probably push, but I don't normally use that toolchain for a variety of reasons, most technical.


A lot of people don't find it necessary to use a BSP.  A lot of people use MSP430ware.  I think some people use BSP430, but I don't get a lot of support requests/bug reports on it, but my experience with PyXB says that lack of evidence of use is not evidence of lack of use.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - that was a mistake of my part, I meant MSP430Ware....


I really appreciate the work you've done on BSP430 & mspgcc. :) As a professional programmer myself (though not an embedded one) you can see the amount of effort that has gone into those projects...


Just as a thought, do you know of any plans to produce a clang/LVVM MSP430 back end? I've worked on the gcc compiler in the past, and to say that its a challenge would be a gross understatement - its a venerable old warhorse that is still extraordinarily useful, but there was a very good reason that the clang project was started....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the compliments.


There is an llvm back-end for msp430, at one of those annoying web sites that require a secure connection and provide an invalid certificate.  I don't know if it's active, and haven't heard from the maintainer in a couple years, but it did use the binutils variant from the mspgcc toolchain.  I don't know how much it depended on that; AFAICT Red Hat wasn't asked to fix all the bugs in the upstream binutils that mspgcc addressed over the years, and the linker script infrastructure is completely different.


I'm moving more towards ARM for my experimentation as it's a far more mature platform in terms of both CPU architecture and toolchain support.  Any BSP430-like infrastructure I come up with there will be in C++11.  I like the MSP430's low power capabilities, but the former EnergyMicro is competitive, and the higher clock rates and shorter startup times on the ARM mitigate against its sometimes higher active current draw.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...