Hair ? Is this a joke ? I kept on laughing the whole day. Very funny.
It is about counting the time until CMCON.6 gets a high level.
Hair ? Is this a joke ? I kept on laughing the whole day. Very funny.
It is about counting the time until CMCON.6 gets a high level.
Just connect pin 2 (C1OUT) to pin 9 or 12 ... and read TMR1H and TMRIL just when needed ...
Details are in that ****ING DATA SHEET... fig 7.1
Alain
PS: No hair lost ... was a pleasure !!!
Last edited by Acetronics2; - 18th February 2007 at 20:31.
************************************************** ***********************
Why insist on using 32 Bits when you're not even able to deal with the first 8 ones ??? ehhhhhh ...
************************************************** ***********************
IF there is the word "Problem" in your question ...
certainly the answer is " RTFM " or " RTFDataSheet " !!!
*****************************************
OR, stop the timer on a comparator interrupt...
In meantime, is there a specific time range?
I'll be back...
Steve
It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
There's no problem, only learning opportunities.
There is no TMR1H and L as TMR0 is 8 Bit. I cannot use TMR1 as I am using the compare-module. Additionally, Pin2 and Pin12 are used.
I would need to check for the timer to overflow in the loop instead of reading its value. As basic is not machinecode I don't know how many tics I am missing by that method, you know ...
MisterE: Interrupts are disabled(INTCON = 0), I am just looking at the 'time' it takes for the comparator's output to change.
What do you mean by time range ?
Before we go too much into detail here: Using my method compared to the built in timer, how many more ticks does the built in timer notice ?
Last edited by selbstdual; - 18th February 2007 at 20:16. Reason: Clarify
Min and Max expected delay between the time you Start the Timer and 'till the comparator's output will change.
Hard to say, but it can be measured with a scope + extra I/O OR by using something like Darrel suggested bellow...Before we go too much into detail here: Using my method compared to the built in timer, how many more ticks does the built in timer notice ?
http://www.picbasic.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=365
i'll do something simple here to help you to start. i think you're not as this far anyway.
stay tunned
Steve
It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
There's no problem, only learning opportunities.
Currently I get values between 1800 and 400 for 'Value'. Whatever, don't hurry to answer this question because my current implementation works already. This is just for finetuning...
Last edited by selbstdual; - 18th February 2007 at 22:34.
Hi,
I would prefer using interrupts.
Your TIMER_ZERO is already a word variable. So on a timer zero interrupt you can just increment the HighByte of the variable and normally dump the TMR0 to the lowbyte. This would make a pseudo 16bit timer. On a comparator interrupt, get the readings. It should not be very difficult in ASM . By the way what is your clock frequency and your timer0 prescaler value ? If you are using a high prescale then Darrel's Instant Interrupt may work.
Regards
Sougata
Difference of time(MyMethod <-> Timer0) is the linchpin of this thread. I can't see a connection between your post and the main question.
This should not be measured. To calculate it, the timer0's speed is needed(How many cycles mean how many countings) and I want to know how fast my current implementation is(there is a number somewhere in the greatly written manual that states how much time these instructions take).
Then I get a comparison.
Last edited by selbstdual; - 21st February 2007 at 04:20.
Bookmarks