41–50 of 68 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need an OS to do more advanced or efficient sleeping. You could have one of the timer peripherals generate an interrupt on a regular basis, and then put the chip in a lower power sleep mode in between interrupts.
Isn't that what an OS would do, essentially?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The other approach to delay's (keep in mind, that there is no other process to yield the CPU too) is to use a timer (a peripheral of the micro controller). This would take a fair bit more code to configure the timer, and setup an interrupt to handle the timer.
How do multiple processes usually 'share' a timer?
Using the interrupt driven approach, can led to better performance both in CPU time (async communication with slower periphials etc) and battery life (sleep states).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Avoid ST at all costs in my experience. Their documentation is terrible. They never acknowledge hardware errata even after clear evidence of it. They’re not a company with a solid engineering culture imo
Which MCU makers do you prefer?
Anybody got USB communication (CDC class) working on this platform without the proprietary libs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
no, i spent months on this, and the answer is no They use IP from synopsis, but synopsis refuses to allow their docs to be published so every manufacturer has to read them and regurgitate them into their own docs in their own words . In any case official STM docs are incomplete. See their driver source - it accesses undocumented registers and sets undocumented bits in documented regs. Without them the usb core will n…
Avoid ST at all costs in my experience. Their documentation is terrible. They never acknowledge hardware errata even after clear evidence of it. They’re not a company with a solid engineering culture imo
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which MCU makers do you prefer?
Atmel (now under Microchip). They have great documentation and software libraries. And they actually acknowledge hardware errata in the documentation.
I will say that STM has definitely released better tools that make it much easier to get designs up and running (STM32Cube specifically).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which MCU makers do you prefer?
Atmel (now under Microchip). They have great documentation and software libraries. And they actually acknowledge hardware errata in the documentation.
More so for Microchip than Atmel --- it's pretty common to find on some of their newer and more complex parts a ton of errata, among which there are some extremely "WTF!?" ones like "feature X does not work at all".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
no, i spent months on this, and the answer is no They use IP from synopsis, but synopsis refuses to allow their docs to be published so every manufacturer has to read them and regurgitate them into their own docs in their own words . In any case official STM docs are incomplete. See their driver source - it accesses undocumented registers and sets undocumented bits in documented regs. Without them the usb core will n…
Avoid ST at all costs in my experience. Their documentation is terrible. They never acknowledge hardware errata even after clear evidence of it. They’re not a company with a solid engineering culture imo
This was a really interesting article, and I learned a lot. I'm very much lacking in chip/assembly level knowledge, and this helped me to understand a little bit more. Thank you, Lochsh, for writing it!
This is lovely to hear, I'm so glad it was helpful!
I spent a month and got things working with a modern toolchain C/CMake/GCC/OpenOCD but gave up on further work bc I couldn't nail down a lot of details. micro programming outside arduino is painful and backward. it's stuck in the 90s