| ??? 03/13/05 22:51 Read: times |
#89591 - Total Agreement Responding to: ???'s previous message |
I am in total agreement with you Peter. I have had dozens of projects that used software bit-banged I2C to various types of devices and in general it has been totally reliable to let other interrupts come and go while the mainline code does its thing with the I2C interface.
Michael Karas |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| 89C66x and 89C51RD2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| hw IIC vs bitbang | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| can u illustrate/elaborate wth some code | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| rate does not matter | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Not true ! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Total Agreement | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| what about XRAM? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| XRAM and mnufacturers | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| XRAM, more | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| SW-I2C mostly sufficient ! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| similar CPU load?? pray explain | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| "...significant advantage..." | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how do you do soft IIC with 1% load | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| 1% = | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Peters 1% | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| very high data rates?? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| consider the whole program ! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Its really very high. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| how can microresistance | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Forum rules - no SMS | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
the skinny | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| sorry for the informal language | 01/01/70 00:00 |