| ??? 02/09/07 19:46 Read: times |
#132410 - define maximum rate... Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Andy Neil said:
I would suspect that the limiting factor would be not so much the UART itself, but the rest of the code being able to process the data sufficiently quickly...? To add to the complexity: Does the OP mean sustainable bitrate? or burst bitrate? let me clarify: You can provide a simple buffer of say 16 or 32 or even 256 bytes, that you can fill without "interpreting" the data. This means that one can receive a burst of [buffer-size] bytes at a higher rate than the sustained data rate whereby the processing time of data must also be considered... needless to say I don't have a clue about the value of eithet rate :-) regards Patrick |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Maximum Reliable UART Baud Rates for 805x | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The UART in any chip with a T2 can run at F | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Thanks guys. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not quite | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| syntax error | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Point taken | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| welcome to the club | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Some club ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| they just were too square :) | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Mmmh, yeah, well ... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not necessarily | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Polling | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| not only this... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Scheme | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| isn't it the same? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| polling all the way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Wrong question? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| define maximum rate... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| semantics | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| for the standard '51/'52... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| HUH | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| PC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| non-standard | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Why comes in UART on PC and 232 buffer? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sorry | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Good note | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| OK I take back | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| CP210x USB-UART | 01/01/70 00:00 |