Allow using alternate GPIO pins or eliminate gpio consumption with i2c based gpio

[Dloranger]

I am building a fairly complicated system with the pi3 and find that the two gpio you used are already in use by other boards. I would like to have the Pico UPS designed into the system as the usage may be far up in the mountains where it is difficult to recover from a bad shutdown, right now I can't do this.

I have several questions below

Question 1,

Short term -
what changes can I make to the board and software to get the signals onto different GPIO pins? I am very comfortable with cutting traces, and doing very fine pitch soldering if appropriate. I have access to great tools so I can do most any reasonable mods. I would like to use pins 11 and 37 currently as those are the only 2x20 header pins still open.

Looking at the software, it appears I only need to edit the following to fix the sw
https://github.com/modmypi/PiModules/blob/master/code/python/upspico/picofssd/scripts/picofssd#L25-L26

but I need to know where to cut/jump to bring in these pins in the board where they won't interfere with my other boards..

long term -
Unless there is a strong reason against it, you are already consuming the I2C bus, so why not use an expander like the MCP23017 or a register in the I2C device that could be polled?

perhaps you could also include some options in the board like solderable jumpers or 0-ohm resistors to select between a few of the gpio pins if you can't fit a gpio expander on the board? For selfish reasons, I would like to have 11 and 37 be the alternates :-)

Question 2,
It appears you are using I2C addresses 0x6b and 0x69 - Please confirm if these are the only addresses in use?

Question 3,
For the I2C bus usage, I am using the modern device tree to load up several devices (mostly MCP23017 gpio expanders, but also some others) on the I2C bus.

Can you please update the instructions with a device tree overlay so that I can merge it with my existing overlay rather than having to load the /etc/modules method. I haven't tried yet until I get my hardware delivered, but trying to ensure no conflicts where the two methods stomp on each other.

[PiModules]

Hi, This PCB is 4 layers, 6/8 mils density. It is not possible to do any changes by hands. We plan to have version of firmware that is not using any GPIO. However due to unexpected changes in production we ware forced to change our plans for some weeks. We will announce a very good news this week, by the end, that will cover your requirements. Please be patient as we are working hard to do the best possible. Also due to density of components we used on this PCB, it is ultra difficult to add any other IC without changing of the technology of PCB (smaller vias, smaller components - smaller than 0603, or more layers) that cause an increase of price, and new production setup, facts that we would prefer to avoid as it would be generating a strong delays in delivery again. Please be patient, solution we will offer will  free the GPIOs. There is no place to put even jumpers (without penalties), as each place of the copper has been used for cooling, high power tracks, or just signal tracks. We are working on GPIO version of firmware compatible with all version of PIco A,B and any other new one. Best Regards Io

…

On 3/11/2018 10:54 PM, Daniel Loranger wrote: Common to many boards of this nature, it would be great to be able to use alternate GPIO pins to avoid a conflict with other HATS. I am building a fairly complicated system and find that the two gpio you used are already in use by other boards. I would like to have the Pico UPS designed into the system as the usage may be far up in the mountains where it is difficult to recover from a bad shutdown, right now I can't do this. Short term - what changes can I make to the board and software to get the signals onto different GPIO pins? I am very comfortable with cutting traces, and doing very fine pitch soldering if appropriate. I have access to great tools so I can do most any reasonable mods. I would like to use pins 11 and 17 currently as those are still open and most convenient. long term - Unless there is a strong reason against it, you are already consuming the I2C bus, so why not use an expander like the MCP23017 or similar to route the GPIO back into the processor? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#15>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIJ_hK_pS37OXZitmiWW6KCTmhVcVSfpks5tdY71gaJpZM4Sl2lZ>.

-- Ioannis www.pimodules.com --

[Dloranger]

Good to hear there is a firmware update coming very soon that will fit my needs, many thanks! I won't see my hardware for about 2 weeks, so any time before then would be fine. By The way, The board is highly recommended within my contacts. Good work.

…

On Sun, Mar 11, 2018, 3:44 PM Pi Master ***@***.***> wrote: Hi, This PCB is 4 layers, 6/8 mils density. It is not possible to do any changes by hands. We plan to have version of firmware that is not using any GPIO. However due to unexpected changes in production we ware forced to change our plans for some weeks. We will announce a very good news this week, by the end, that will cover your requirements. Please be patient as we are working hard to do the best possible. Also due to density of components we used on this PCB, it is ultra difficult to add any other IC without changing of the technology of PCB (smaller vias, smaller components - smaller than 0603, or more layers) that cause an increase of price, and new production setup, facts that we would prefer to avoid as it would be generating a strong delays in delivery again. Please be patient, solution we will offer will free the GPIOs. There is no place to put even jumpers (without penalties), as each place of the copper has been used for cooling, high power tracks, or just signal tracks. We are working on GPIO version of firmware compatible with all version of PIco A,B and any other new one. Best Regards Io On 3/11/2018 10:54 PM, Daniel Loranger wrote: > > Common to many boards of this nature, it would be great to be able to > use alternate GPIO pins to avoid a conflict with other HATS. > > I am building a fairly complicated system and find that the two gpio > you used are already in use by other boards. I would like to have the > Pico UPS designed into the system as the usage may be far up in the > mountains where it is difficult to recover from a bad shutdown, right > now I can't do this. > > Short term - what changes can I make to the board and software to get > the signals onto different GPIO pins? I am very comfortable with > cutting traces, and doing very fine pitch soldering if appropriate. I > have access to great tools so I can do most any reasonable mods. I > would like to use pins 11 and 17 currently as those are still open and > most convenient. > > long term - Unless there is a strong reason against it, you are > already consuming the I2C bus, so why not use an expander like the > MCP23017 or similar to route the GPIO back into the processor? > > — > You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#15>, or mute the thread > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIJ_hK_pS37OXZitmiWW6KCTmhVcVSfpks5tdY71gaJpZM4Sl2lZ >. > -- Ioannis www.pimodules.com -- — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#15 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJ6NjcskiI6DuasT2idaSA5QULmmVFnsks5tdai4gaJpZM4Sl2lZ> .

[Dloranger]

Any updates on the update? I got my hardware delivered today. Thanks

[Dloranger]

Any updates on this issue?

[Dloranger]

Any updates on this issue? It has been 3 weeks since you said "We will announce a very good news this week, by the end, that will cover your requirements. " Still waiting...

[PiModules]

Hi, We have had some production (of the HV3.0B+) issues that required to be urgent solved, we are under final testing and just after the Easter (our Orthodox Easter, we have it one week after yours) will be released Warmest Regards Ioannis

…

On 4/4/2018 5:09 PM, Daniel Loranger wrote: Any updates on this issue? It has been 3 weeks since you said "We will announce a very good news this week, by the end, that will cover your requirements. " Still waiting... — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#15 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIJ_hCJVb91uL2Z6MEO714tfFJoH-wyPks5tlNQugaJpZM4Sl2lZ>.

-- Ioannis www.pimodules.com -- (