|
|
|
Visual Guide to 65xx CPU Timing |
|
|
|
CPU timing specifications can be hard to grasp. Often there's just a single timing diagram provided — and such a diagram is necessarily very general, as it's drawn to accommodate umpteen combinations of operating conditions. This article looks at the information that's supplied, and shows how to relate those timing specs to your own project's operating conditions. Mostly I'll be looking at just a few key signals and how they're specified. Really the subject is how to read a timing diagram and the conventions that CPU data sheets commonly use. In other words it's NOT an attempt to explain every little detail. It's more about the basics of spec-speak, and getting a feel for why the doc is written the way it is. Comments and questions regarding this article are hosted on the 6502.org forum. You can read or add to the discussion here. |
|
| Starting At the Beginning: the Clock signal | |
GIF01 |
|
| Above
is an except from Table 4-2 in WDC's W65C816S
data sheet (Sept
2010 edition). Each row shows a
symbol, a parameter and
a series of numeric values. The symbols' meanings are visually depicted
in a diagram elsewhere in the data sheet (Figure 4-1). The two columns under 5.0 +/- 5% show what we can expect when operating the '816 at 5 volts, and we see that at 5 volts the chip is comparatively fast. tPWL and tPWH show it is guaranteed to deal with clock-low and clock-high durations as short as 35 ns (minimum). What we will see is that these two specs determine the limits of other variables such as duty cycle — and Cycle Time (the reciprocal of operating frequency). In other words the operating frequency (such 14 Mhz) is merely a dependent variable. The dog wags the tail — not the other way 'round! The limits for tPWL and tPWH are what determine the limits of the other variables. |
|
GIF02 |
|
| Here
I've redrawn part of WDC's timing diagram, but with one important
difference: all my
diagrams in
this topic are drawn to scale.
The graduations along the top are in nanoseconds, and values such as tPWL
and tPWH
can be read directly. It's like viewing the wave on an oscilloscope.
Datasheet timing diagrams aren't like that. I added the colored bars to serve as visual yardsticks. Also drawn to scale, they illustrate the minimum clock pulse width of 35 ns. But clock pulses are allowed to be longer. (The table indicates the '816 has no upper limit. But some 65xx chips, including the old NMOS 6502, do have an upper limit on clock pulse width.) For discussion's sake let's start with tPWL and tPWH of about 100 ns. In other words the tCYC is about 200 ns (5 MHz), shown below. |
|
GIF03 |
|
| This
diagram
(an animated GIF) shows that at 5 MHz (tCYC
= 200ns) the clock duty cycle can be varied greatly. At this speed you
can drastically shorten tPWH
while lengthening tPWL,
or vice versa, and that's completely
okay.
As noted, the colored bars show 35 ns — and that's the
minimum clock
pulse, the thing that needs to be respected. We see there's a wide
margin of tolerance before the minimum spec is approached (YELLOW)
or violated (RED). What happens when Cycle Time tCYC is shorter (faster)? |
|
GIF04 |
|
| Now
let's reduce both tPWL
and tPWH
to about 50 ns, shortening tCYC
(ie; raising the operating frequency). This has implications regarding duty cycle. But first, here's a point which is absolutely crucial:
This has implications regarding the "shape" of the cycle. The proportions are different at different operating frequencies. Watching the animation above it's clear that satisfying minimum tPWL and tPWH takes a modest slice of the Cycle Time at first. Then, when the Cycle Time shrinks by half, there's decidedly less margin in satisfying the minimum 35 ns spec. On a scale drawing the proportions can be seen at a glance. (See also the examples later.) Unfortunately, timing diagrams in data sheets typically aren't drawn to scale, which makes them useless for visual evaluation of proportions. If you want a scale drawing it can be very helpful to make your own  —
specific to the
operating frequency you've chosen. But, because a scale drawing is
specific to the operating frequency chosen, data sheets usually avoid
them. Data sheets need to be general; they can't include an individual
timing diagram for every possible prospective operating frequency. But
if you want that visual insight it's not hard to modify the
datasheet's timing diagram using an image editor. Or just redraw it
from scratch. There's a modified '816 timing diagram here,
which I scaled for 14 MHz.Now back to the matter of duty cycle.  |
|
GIF05  |
|
| tCYC is now 100 ns (10 MHz). Compared to GIF03, the tolerance for duty-cycle variations is reduced but still remains. | |
GIF06 |
|
| Finally we shorten tPWL and tPWH to the minimum value (35 ns). | |
GIF07 |
|
| With
tPWL
and tPWH
at the minimum value, tCYC
is now about 70 ns (14 MHz). At this speed, the duty-cycle must be
50:50, as any variation would mean a violation of either the tPWL
or tPWH
minimum spec. We have seen that tPWL and tPWH determine not only the permissible duty cycle but also the maximum operating frequency (14 MHz at 5 volts). Operating frequency is a dependent variable, and could be omitted from the chart. Nevertheless it's convenient that WDC included it. What happens when VDD is reduced? |
|
GIF08 |
|
| To
show what happens when we operate the '816 at voltages below 5
volts, above we have another excerpt from Table 4-2. At 3.3 volts the tPWL
& tPWH
minimum spec almost doubles. I'm guessing I don't need to redo the GIF
diagrams to illustrate this, so please just imagine
that the colored bars in the diagrams have grown from 35 ns to about
62.5 ns. In the first example (GIF03, at 5 MHz) wider colored bars (increased minimum spec) would merely mean less tolerance regarding duty cycle. But in the later examples (GIF05, at 10 MHz), the wider bars would show that tPWL and tPWH violations are inescapable.  The limits on
minimum tPWL
& tPWH
are "why" the '816 isn't guaranteed to go faster than 8
MHz at 3.3
volts (or 14 MHz at 5 volts).(In practice it's usually possible to operate successfully at higher speeds. Following the specs assures success, timing-wise, but violating them doesn't necessarily assure failure. When you exceed the guaranteed spec you're relying on unspecified extra leeway — like how much margin the processor passed the tests with, the speed of devices connected, construction, temperature and other factors.) How the CPU Interacts With the Outside World |
|
GIF09 |
|
Above
we see a read cycle. This elementary occurrence is a
back-and-forth transaction between the CPU and the outside world, and
that means we need to accommodate both the CPU and whatever it's
communicating with (typically memory, but possibly an IO device). We'll
discuss the WDC W65C02S, which is highly similar to the '816. (Oct 2010
'C02 data sheet here)
The "man in the middle" is memory. To determine how fast it must respond, we take the CPU cycle time and subtract the two CPU delays. In other words, tCYC - tADS - tDSR = access time. With 5 volt operation those figures are 200 ns - 30 ns - 10 ns = 160 ns, as shown in the diagram. 160 ns is what the CPU leaves available, and all non-CPU delays must fit within that — not just the memory IC itself but all other delays too. A partial list might include the delays of the decoder, the address buffers IC's (if used), and the data-bus transceiver (if used). It's OK if the total of these delays (including the memory IC) is less than 160 ns, but if the total exceeds 160 ns then there'll be a violation of what happens next — tDSR (the Read Data Setup Time). Notice that the rising edge of PHI2 has no relevance to Access Time. In that regard PHI2 simply doesn't matter! But of course as a general requirement the minimums for tPWL and tPWH (shown in green) need to be observed. Many computers use the PHI2 signal as an input to the logic that generates the read enable for memory. But for this job there's nothing magic about PHI2 — alternatives are acceptable. Some machines have clock-generation circuitry that can easily provide a suitable read-enable signal, and such a signal needn't closely mimic PHI2 (although it does need to enable memory soon enough that tDSR will be satisfied).
and a quibblesome loss
of precision.  But if rise & fall times are
known to be short then you'll probably feel comfortable just ignoring
the tiny discrepancy.
|
|
GIF10 |
|
Above
we see the effect on access time when Cycle Time is cut in half. The
"overhead" of tADS
plus tDSR
is constant at 40 ns. Halving the Cycle Time means...
The proportions are
different at a different operating frequency.A Write cycle A write cycle is similar to a read, but the sequence is all one-way — ie; it's all CPU to outside-world. We don't have to get anything back. But now we have two items to send out: the address (as before) but also the write data. The diagrams below show how to determine the start and end of the period during which the address is valid, and likewise the period during which the write data is valid. In a future post maybe we'll run an example, and see whether a specific memory chip of our choice can accommodate such operation. But right now let's just be aware that, "this is what the CPU gives the outside world to work with." Same deal with the read cycle's Access Time — it's what the CPU expects the outside world to work with. |
|
GIF11 |
|
| As
with the previous examples, we see (below) that changing the cycle
time alters the shape (proportions) of the waveforms. As noted, that's
because delays specified in ns remain at the specified ns figure
regardless of changes in operating frequency. With writes, the rising edge of PHI2 merits more attention, because PHI2 is the signal that tells the CPU to enable its tristate buffers and drive the data bus. In certain cases it might be advantageous to change the duty cycle so the PHI2 rising edge occurs sooner. That means the buffer-enable delay, tMDS, would be completed sooner, resulting in a more generous data-valid window for the outside world to work with. |
|
GIF12  |
|
| Comments and questions regarding this article are hosted on the 6502.org forum. You can read or add to the discussion here. | |
|
|
 |
|
|
|