CC3200 LaunchPad Pins Map

[igor 163]

Suggestion/clarification for the version 1.0 diagram:

 

PIN_21 (which is on P2, black number 13) should be faded, and should have a label in gray saying SOP2 (or something similar).

 

In order for this boosterpack pin to be PIN_21, jumper J14 would have to be installed (which is not the case in the picture).

As pictured PIN_21 is connected to TCK from the JTAG programmer (that is what the long jumper wire shown in white does).

 

It is recommended that GPIO_25 (which is what connects to PIN_21) be used for output only 

(since if this pin were driven externally it could interfere with booting, also there is a pull down resistor on the board for this pin).

 

Bottom line - this pin is not connected to the boosterpack connector by default (or as pictured in the diagram), although it is easier to connect to the boosterpack connector than most of the faded items, and should be used with care (output only, can't use with the programming jumper in place, has external pulldown).

 

References: CC3200 Launchpad hardware user's guide 2.4.6 and 2.4.5

Schematic

swru367a.pdf - Table 16-13 Sense on Power Configuration, page 502 - especially see note at bottom of table

[Rei Vilo 695]

@@igor

 

Thank you for the PIN_21 related suggestion.

 

Contrary to previous LaunchPads, the CC3200 is really difficult to map...

[al1fch 5]

Considering P58-3V3 jumper I suggest to remove it on this pin map

 

This short is dangerous for this pin :

-in digital output mode

-in ADC mode (ADC input not 3V3 tolerant  : 1,8V absolute max, 1,46V full scale )

 

Maybe we could suggest "Remove this jumper as soon as playing with out of the box demo is finished" !!

[igor 163]

 

Contrary to previous LaunchPads, the CC3200 is really difficult to map...

 

Yes, it seems really complicated.  On the other hand that makes the map all the more valuable.  

Thank you for taking this on.

 

To add to the complexity, it seems there are an unusually large number of ways to refer to pins on the CC3200.

There is the pin number on the IC package/boosterpack silkscreen (PIN_04) (the names Energia gives)

There is the port/pin number (port A1 pin 5) which Energia further complicates by naming the ports with an S, rather than an A.

There is the number that Energia uses for the pin (e.g. 3)

There are the GPIO numbers (GPIO_13)

(With any luck the names above all refer to the same pin, although I wouldn't stake much on the chances that I got them all right. ;-)

 

Probably need an additional spreadsheet just to give all the equivalent names.

Too bad they used the IC package pin numbers to label the booster pack pins, seems like the port and pin #s (as used on Tiva) or the GPIO numbers might have been less confusing.  (Just imagine if TI ever comes out with another chip in this line with a different pinout.)

 

(I am not suggesting adding any of that mess to the Pin map, just thinking what else would help handle the complexity of this platform.)

[Rei Vilo 695]

@@igor You're right, it's a mess!

 

Now, I prefer to stick with the Energia naming convention and avoid any confusion with the multiple naming schemes

[chicken 630]

I agree with @@igor and @@Rei Vilo

 

In addition to the labeling, I think that in the case of the CC3200 it would have been better to stick to the 20 pin format.

 

The CC3200 has 64 pins, many of which are already used for clock, JTAG, WiFi, sensors etc., so it's hard to find 40 that don't already serve double-duty. With Energia and the beginner in mind, 20 pins without any caveats is IMO preferable over maximizing the number of I/Os.

[Rei Vilo 695]

Well, the PIN_57 naming scheme is misleading. Use instead the pins numbers in black.

 

So please find an updated version of the pins map for the LaunchPad CC3200.

 

[igor 163]

Well, the PIN_57 naming scheme is misleading. Use instead the pins numbers in black.

 

I think the version with the PIN_57 numbers on was better - at least it gives cross-reference for the two numbering schemes that a beginner is most likely to encounter.  (The pin numbers defined by Energia, and the silkscreen labels.)  Somebody coming from Arduino might (understandably) expect the pin numbers on the board to be what you put into Energia to access that pin.

Having both numbers here helps emphasize that this is not the case (and points out/reminds that to use the silkscreen number, you have to add "PIN_" in front of the number.

 

i.e., can write digitalRead(PIN_57) or digitalRead(23) - means the same thing. 

They (and we) are going to see both schemes used, so might as well have a convenient cross-reference.

 

[Edit:] Even if you do not want to maintain the version with the names on, would be nice to leave a copy in this thread for those who found it helpful.  Thanks.

[Rei Vilo 695]

@@igor

 

I fully agree with you: the PIN_57 was closest to the MCU, like the P1.6 and P4_2 for others.

 

Now, an engineer from TI explained me there were incompatibilities between the different naming schemes: pin number of the MCU, pin name, pin referenced in TivaWare, etc. and asked me to keep the LaunchPad pins numbers only.

 

That's why I've removed the version with the pins names, to avoid any misunderstanding.

 

I hope next LaunchPads will have a better and cleaner implementation for the pins naming schemes.

[igor 163]

Thanks for the explanation about the pin naming.

So is pin.h deprecated?  (Or at least they may be moving in that direction.)

 

Considering P58-3V3 jumper I suggest to remove it on this pin map

 

This short is dangerous for this pin :

-in digital output mode

-in ADC mode (ADC input not 3V3 tolerant  : 1,8V absolute max, 1,46V full scale )

 

Maybe we could suggest "Remove this jumper as soon as playing with out of the box demo is finished" !!

 

So why does the pin map show a jumper there?  I did not find it in the SDK hardware guide.

If it is something that comes with the board but should be removed, perhaps it should be mentioned on the 

http://energia.nu/pin-maps/guide_cc3200launchpad/

and/or

http://energia.nu/cc3200guide/

pages?

[MORA99 9]

The jumper is used in out of box example to force it to run access point mode.

The pin is 3v3 compatible, but only if its used as a digital input, if you change to adc mode with the jumper installed it may damage the chip, a bit dangerous.

[al1fch 5]

Suggested , for chip safe  :

 

-in http://energia.nu/pin-maps/guide_cc3200launchpad/ remove white rectangle 'PIN58 - Vcc'

 

-in http://energia.nu/cc3200guide/ add something that :

Your board comes with a short between PIN58 and VCC. That's usefull for 'out of the box' demo.
Remove this jumper unless you explicitely decide tu use PIN58  as  DIGITAL INPUT, forced at high level !!"
Keeping this jumper may damage your board as soon as you use PIN58 in Digital Ouput mode or in Analog input mode. 

[Rei Vilo 695]

You're right.

 

I've changed the map and released version 1.3.

 

Too much work with the pins map to play with the LaunchPad   

[zaphreux 0]

Hi all,

 

Trying to use PUSH1 for testing, but using pin 4 as described on last pin maps for launchpad CC3200. My programm failed to see changed when I push the button.

Using PUSH1 define, my programm work well.

In file pins_energia.h, PUSH1 is defined as 3, and on pin map picture, PUSH1 is show as pin 4

 

Regards

[radiator 0]

Rei Vilo

 

>>The next release of the pins map uses light colour for not connected pins.

 

Just to be certain that I understand - the light colors indicate that those pins are defined for booster packs but are not actually connected (at all?) on the CC3200 Launchpad board?