HI2CREAD and HI2CWRITE

Closed Thread
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Hybrid View

  1. - 12th April 2007, 22:24 #1
    garryp4's Avatar
    garryp4
    garryp4 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    colorado
    Posts
    5

    Default HI2CREAD and HI2CWRITE

    Make the hardware I2C port available same as HSERIN / HSEROUT.
  2. - 12th April 2007, 23:32 #2
    skimask's Avatar
    skimask Guest

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by garryp4 View Post
    Make the hardware I2C port available same as HSERIN / HSEROUT.
    Explain a bit more...doesn't make a lot of sense...
  3. - 13th April 2007, 01:33 #3
    mister_e's Avatar
    mister_e
    mister_e is offline Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    We are in the PBP wish list section...

    garryp4 want to have new statements (HI2CREAD/WRITE) that use the Hardware MSSP module instead of using I2CREAD/WRITE. Something like SERIN/HSERIN PWM/HPWM
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.
  4. - 13th April 2007, 04:04 #4
    skimask's Avatar
    skimask Guest

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mister_e View Post
    We are in the PBP wish list section...
    Huh...missed that entirely...
    Yes, I2C/HI2C...good idea...
  5. - 13th April 2007, 10:29 #5
    garryp4's Avatar
    garryp4
    garryp4 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    colorado
    Posts
    5

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    I was a bit dissapointed to find out that the I2C speed with the I2CREAD/WRITE commands are much slower that what the offered hardware is capable of. To get to this speed requires the use of writing some ASM code, which why we use PBP in the first place. I could really use this speed. The PIC supports it but PBP don't. However, I have found what PBP does support to be easy and work the first time every time.
  6. - 13th April 2007, 13:33 #6
    skimask's Avatar
    skimask Guest

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garryp4 View Post
    I was a bit dissapointed to find out that the I2C speed with the I2CREAD/WRITE commands are much slower that what the offered hardware is capable of. To get to this speed requires the use of writing some ASM code, which why we use PBP in the first place. I could really use this speed. The PIC supports it but PBP don't. However, I have found what PBP does support to be easy and work the first time every time.
    The software commands are fairly fast...but I don't know what you are considering to be fast. At 40mhz, I can generally erase a 32k eeprom byte-by-byte in about 4 seconds or so. No, not fast by any stretch, but as you state, easy to do.
  7. - 9th April 2008, 16:14 #7
    Andy Baker's Avatar
    Andy Baker
    Andy Baker is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    4

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Exclamation Yes Yes Yes Hardware I2c!!!

    Please please please implement hardware I2C for devices that support it! The I2CWrtite I'm using is sucking up TONS of code space, is slow as death, and is making me nuts!

    Andy
  8. - 9th April 2008, 16:20 #8
    mister_e's Avatar
    mister_e
    mister_e is offline Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    .... oops sorry....

    Which device you need to talk to?
    Last edited by mister_e; - 9th April 2008 at 16:22.
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.
  9. - 9th April 2008, 16:31 #9
    skimask's Avatar
    skimask Guest

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mister_e View Post
    We are in the PBP wish list section...
    garryp4 want to have new statements (HI2CREAD/WRITE) that use the Hardware MSSP module instead of using I2CREAD/WRITE. Something like SERIN/HSERIN PWM/HPWM
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Baker View Post
    Please please please implement hardware I2C for devices that support it! The I2CWrtite I'm using is sucking up TONS of code space, is slow as death, and is making me nuts!
    Andy
    Quote Originally Posted by mister_e View Post
    .... oops sorry....
    Which device you need to talk to?
    What do you think of "@ hi2cwrite / hi2cread" type command?
    Is that even possible? Can't pass many variables that way. They'd have to be preset. You'd have to have a number of different versions to handle the different 'item' possibilities...
    Unless...you hijacked the original i2cread/i2cwrite commands with a flag set somewhere...hmmmmm
  10. - 9th April 2008, 16:37 #10
    mister_e's Avatar
    mister_e
    mister_e is offline Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    montreal, canada
    Posts
    6,898

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    In theory it's possible... on the down side, i'm not sure Microchip always use the same naming convention between all their PICs... not surprised at all if not. But yes ... possible.

    Some "HiJack" method? Possible too... 'till now the user will need to manually modify the PBP library
    Steve

    It's not a bug, it's a random feature.
    There's no problem, only learning opportunities.
  11. - 10th April 2008, 03:49 #11
    Darrel Taylor's Avatar
    Darrel Taylor
    Darrel Taylor is offline Fanatical Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    4,959

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Default

    HI2CREAD and HI2CWRITE? Why stop there? What about ...

    SPI Master
    SPI Slave

    I2C Master
    I2C Multi-Master
    I2C Slave

    If you want to support the SSP modules, you should support the Whole Module.
    And both kinds ... SSP/MSSP.
    <br>
    DT
  12. - 28th May 2008, 05:26 #12
    leisryan's Avatar
    leisryan
    leisryan is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    41

    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No

    Talking Hardware Mssp

    Quote Originally Posted by mister_e View Post
    In theory it's possible... on the down side, i'm not sure Microchip always use the same naming convention between all their PICs... not surprised at all if not. But yes ... possible.

    Some "HiJack" method? Possible too... 'till now the user will need to manually modify the PBP library
    PDS has everything running on Hardware MSSP PBP developers please implement them!!! acting like Motorola "One hit wonder" mongers
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Members who have read this thread : 0

You do not have permission to view the list of names.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Forum Rules