<Joerg-Neo900>
was this a comprehensive answer to your question?
Pali has joined #neo900
<houkime>
ok
Pali has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Pali has joined #neo900
l_bratch has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
l_bratch has joined #neo900
Pali has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<houkime>
p2501 - pin1 in the wrong place. Looks like fp needs to be mirrored.
<houkime>
it is facing downwards correctly, but in order to connect pin1 to pin1 on bb-xm in needs to be mirrired
<houkime>
however it is quite hard totell whether it was already countered on the pin assignment level or not
<houkime>
*to tell
Pali has joined #neo900
<houkime>
rechecked using bbxm System reference manual.
<houkime>
yep, pin1 as it is assigned right now should go to pin1
<houkime>
of bbxm
<houkime>
so connector should be mirrored for this to happen
<houkime>
or has its pins reassigned
<houkime>
what is better?
<houkime>
*should have pins reassigned
<houkime>
reassigning signals is a sch tweaking and renumbering pins is a fp tweaking (which breaks standard numbering scheme btw)
drrty has joined #neo900
Pali has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<Joerg-Neo900>
please no renumbering of pins. pin1 of a connector is same on both side F and M connector half
<Joerg-Neo900>
however we'll follow manuf's numbering even if it breaks the "pin1 == pin1" pragma
<Joerg-Neo900>
if a female connector pin1 goes to anything that's not pin1 on the male connector counterpart, it needs a varbatim note on that nasty fact in schematics
illwieckz_ has joined #neo900
illwieckz has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<Joerg-Neo900>
also possible (made up example): "UPPER_J42-F:pin1 (== Murata_X666-20B2B-Male:pin1) == BB-xM_J17:pin28" (BB_xM not using the Murata component pin numbers and instead inventing their own numbering)
<houkime>
shouldn't default header numbering mirror that of a female?
ossguy has quit [Quit: leaving]
<houkime>
the manuf doesn't really say anything about this in the datacheet
<houkime>
*datasheet
<houkime>
it's not a chiral mezzanine, just a 2-row stacker
<houkime>
i'm just thinking now where this numbering even came from initially
<houkime>
looks like one just took a female socket of bb-xm and used it as a header.
<houkime>
hmm... this numbering is from a default-ish "header' fp library. hmm...
<houkime>
ok. rechecking internets.
<houkime>
yes, females and male should be mirrored.
<houkime>
and the header pin numbers are correct
<houkime>
so logically this means that bb-xm indeed uses non-standard pin numbering
illwieckz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<houkime>
need to notice though that camera connector is meant to be connected by right-angle connectors so that camera sticks
xmn has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
threebar has joined #neo900
threebar has joined #neo900
threebar has quit [Changing host]
<houkime>
thereby a conclusion: signals should be reassigned and note should be left in the sch about this.
<houkime>
this also means that other bb-xm connections also need careful rechecking
xmn has joined #neo900
wpwrak has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
wpwrak has joined #neo900
<houkime>
looks like mcbsp ausio P2502 refers to "P18" in sch for some reason while in SRM (from github) it is p10
<houkime>
man, bb-xm is so old.
<houkime>
even git manual is from 2012
<houkime>
and still worth more than 100$. My pc motherboard is 2-fold cheaper (around 50$) and it can do all ryzens.
<houkime>
hmm... so usual dev time for this kind of thing is around 2 years, as it seems. Neo900 needs to hurry up.