• State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 22 subscribers
  • Views 1686 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
How was your experience today?
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

routines for LPC & I2C

geert starre

Does anyone know where
I can get working I2C routines
for Philips LPC in Keil C ?
The version from Keil's site
does not read data correctly.
I can not get it to work.
Thanx in advance.

Parents
  • 0 in reply to geert starre

    Hi,

    Thanks for the info, looks like a nice product.

    You are right that the bitwise and bytewise I2C implementation are incompatible.

    Just a little comment.

    "problem with I2C bitwise
    hardware is speed, it can
    never reach speeds up
    to 400 kB/sec.
    So master must be able to
    detect a slave's clock-
    stretch. Not all masters
    can do this."

    Bitwise I2C does require a lot more CPU power. But if an I2C master does not allow a slave to stretch the clock then it does not truely comply to the I2C spec.

    The bytewise has lower overhead for the CPU, also the LPC9xx core is a 2 clk core and more powerfull.

    Regards,

    Bauke

Reply
  • 0 in reply to geert starre

    Hi,

    Thanks for the info, looks like a nice product.

    You are right that the bitwise and bytewise I2C implementation are incompatible.

    Just a little comment.

    "problem with I2C bitwise
    hardware is speed, it can
    never reach speeds up
    to 400 kB/sec.
    So master must be able to
    detect a slave's clock-
    stretch. Not all masters
    can do this."

    Bitwise I2C does require a lot more CPU power. But if an I2C master does not allow a slave to stretch the clock then it does not truely comply to the I2C spec.

    The bytewise has lower overhead for the CPU, also the LPC9xx core is a 2 clk core and more powerfull.

    Regards,

    Bauke

Children
No data