| ??? 06/14/05 15:44 Read: times |
#94903 - watchdog ad absurdum Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Besides I don't like using watchdogs at all (depending on application, but for me it is better to fail to stop than to cover up the failure):
Erik Malund said:
The only internal watchdog type I consider acceptable is the one that require two consequtive and different writes to reset. The only internal watchdog type I consider acceptable is the one which does not run out of the processors clock. Quite rare isn't it? Erik Malund said:
Such an internal WD is superior to an external (a runaway may toggle the bit that the external WDS requires. If you are "paranoid" enough, you can easily build an external WD which requires a much more sophisticated reset. Jan Waclawek |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| AT89C51RD2 without supervisor IC | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RC is never good | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| watchdog ad absurdum | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| and uses a bunch of pins | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| wd | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| paranoia revisited - wd 2 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| when the full story | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| WD3 | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| if code run astray | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Has been discussed before | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| External ones are better | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| External ones are better in one respect | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Yes, but... | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Nope, never use an external when | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Exactly! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Combined Watchdogs | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| External better in another respect | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| I'm using the internal and works well | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| works well - how do you know | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| who should test it? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| nobody | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| the manufacturer should | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Design Verification | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
one off | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| The meaning of "well" | 01/01/70 00:00 |