hi can someone tell me how to configure the FRAM FM20L08
thank's for your help! no i don't have any experience with other memory devices, and/or the 8051 in general.i will ask to Ramtron if they have any exemple with.
"no i don't have any experience with other memory devices, and/or the 8051 in general"
OK, so what you really need to do is to learn to walk before you try to run - it's not really the job of either Keil or Ramtron to teach you the basics of 8051 embedded systems!
Here are some introductory & reference materials: http://www.keil.com/books/8051books.asp www.8052.com/books.phtml www.8052.com/tutorial.phtml
The following documents are often referred to as "the bible" for the 8051:
Chapter 1 - 80C51 Family Architecture: www.nxp.com/.../80C51_FAM_ARCH_1.pdf
Chapter 2 - 80C51 Family Programmer's Guide and Instruction Set: www.nxp.com/.../80C51_FAM_PROG_GUIDE_1.pdf
Chapter 3 - 80C51 Family Hardware Description: www.nxp.com/.../80C51_FAM_HARDWARE_1.pdf
i need to defeet the 8051 in the float point code
where to start plz?
"i need to defeet the 8051"
A pair of small clippers should do it...
ok.mister it's a good advice.
Hmmm... That makes no sense. The call to task_wait should cause an immediate scheduling pass, and some other task should get a full 1ms at that point. When the next scheduling pass happens, your high-priority task will come back in until it calls task_wait again.
Could it be that it's always the same low-priority task that comes in, and all your other low-priority tasks get starved? That should not happen, and I doubt that such a basic bug could survive in the task-scheduler until now, but who knows?
One other thought - how are you calling task_wait? Are you using 0 for the task_id, or are you using an actual task ID? If so, could you be using the wrong task ID? You should probably just use 12.
Also, task_wait takes a signal-mask as an argument. If those signals are already triggered, task_wait may just return immediately without causing a scheduling pass.
If you don't need the signals, you should probably use task_sleep(0,1,4,1,7); instead.
"Hmmm... That makes no sense."
You're dead right there!
What do you think you were replying to...?