??? 12/29/05 20:27 Read: times |
#106194 - Hm, sounding like there is no clean fix Responding to: ???'s previous message |
well, the serials need to run at 115k. The product is spec'd that way. I have a 32 byte ring buffer that is used by the serial ISR to save the incoming data, so that ISR is very short. The ring buffer is unloaded in the 1ms OS_Task.
Perhaps my logic is flawed. I thought that my combination of tests of the flags would cover all scenarios regardless of latency (within reason). I should probably spend some more brain-time on it. The PCA is not very short, I will try to shorten it. But if there is a flaw in my logic, then there is no bulletproof solution. When the pulse period is less than the PCA period, the math is correct every time, for very slow pulses I count 1ms ticks. Its the mid-range frequencies that I need to fix now where the PCA rollover was being used. My backup plan is to generate a midrange timebase with T0, and poll that in the PCA ISR. For the midrange frequencies, the error from the latency should be liveable. Ugly, but should be ok. I will post my results, thanks for all the feedback Bob (We should have lunch next time I'm in NC) |
Topic | Author | Date |
PCA extension | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
is this what you mean | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
a major boo-boo | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Still trying. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Use Tags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
tags? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Look Below | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
that will make it erratic any time | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Is there any way.....? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
everything depends | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hm, sounding like there is no clean fix | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Hold flags | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
I fixed it, sort of......![]() | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Compiler | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
should not be t he problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
sketching an idea | 01/01/70 00:00 |