Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
07/03/04 01:10
Read: times


 
#73563 - RE: Second opinion, DS89C420 or P89C669
Responding to: ???'s previous message
"I've found in P89C669 errata sheet some problems with 9 bit UART "

The inadvertant change of RB8 and SBUF values does appear to be a bad bug. And since you seem to be needing 9-bit comm for your m_bus, could be a problem. Might need a more in depth analysis before deciding to drop the chip.

"And here is also unpleasant possibility to erase the boot vector. "

With a good supervisor chip, having brownout detection, this worry is a thing of past. You can search this forum for a document called No-Touch by Erik which addresses this issue nicely.

If you ask me I will settle for the P89c669.

Raghu





List of 3 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
Second opinion, DS89C420 or P89C669            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: Second opinion, DS89C420 or P89C669            01/01/70 00:00      
   RE: Second opinion, DS89C420 or P89C669            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List