In a PsoC4 project attached below we demonstrate a PWM compare register write bug.
It appears like if reg is written by the CPU at the same time as TC occurs pwm output is forced high for the entire period, and within the next cycle the latest compare value is in effect.
We have tried combinations with RegSwap, which also appears buggy, at certain occasions it swapped immediately.
Looking forward to hearing you and your explanation and best work-around.
I am working on CY8c4245AXI-483 capsense. I have successfully implemented touch detection functionality. In need to operate the touch button so that its associated function gets processed after releasing the touch on specified button. For reference I have attached the snippet which I have used.
Any suggestion on how I could achieve the required result?
error_uart = 0;
CyGlobalIntEnable; /* Enable global interrupts. */
/* Start UART operation */
/* Initialization */
I have been trying to integrate uart and capsense touch functionalities in CY8C 4245 AXI 483 MCU. Everything worked fine until working on individual function but as I merged the UART and CapSense in single project, an issue popped up such as UART stopped receiving data. I am unable to find the issue. Can anyone helpe me/ suggest me a solution..?Show Less
I use the CY8CKIT-037 Kit for a project to implement a MPC algorithm.
After I implemented the code I realized that some easy calculations take a very long time to process...
I just used one of the GPIOs that I set high at the beginning of the calculation and low at the end...
My first idea was that maybe the ISR take too much processing time, then I copied some of the code into an empty project and it still takes way longer than expected..
What could be the reason for that?
One time measurement for example is a for loop for 10 iterations containing 6 additions and 7 multiplications and save the values into an array - this already takes 361µs which is way longer than the complete calculation takes on another chip - I simply have no idea why...
I attached the whole project - maybe someone can help I - I am stuck...
Thank you very much in advance..Show Less
We noticed that the CAN error return macro returns 1x in binary with a CAN bus-off error, while the macro/define for BUS OFF is set to 0x10 (hex). We believe this is a typo/error in the api itself, as the CPU returns 0x02 and not 0x10. In fact, the register only has 2 bits in address 0x402E000C, 17:16 for ERROR_STATE, and is not able to return 0x10, only "1x" (binary).
This is with PSoC Creator 4.4 and the latest CAN block. In the generated source code it says:
/* Error status of CAN */
#define CAN_ERROR_ACTIVE (0x00u)
#define CAN_ERROR_PASIVE (0x01u)
#define CAN_ERROR_BUS_OFF (0x10u)
When it SHOULD say (but used as a mask):
/* Error status of CAN */
#define CAN_ERROR_ACTIVE (0x00u)
#define CAN_ERROR_PASSIVE (0x01u)
#define CAN_ERROR_BUS_OFF (0x02u)
The module IS returning 1x (binary) and not 0x10. So, we believe this to be a bug in the API. PSoC 4100SShow Less
My Project is BLE with Fixed stack bootloader: CYBLE-224116-01 Silicon: 1A6F, Family: AA, Major/Minor Rev: AC
Bootloader and Bootloadable component version is 1.60
Some boards program fine. Others, once OTA upgraded successfully, are then is stuck in a boot loop. You cannot attach a debugger because it is not stable enough to get the device ID.
Using PSoc Programmer, the .HEX files read from the two devices are identical.
What could be wrong?
I am doing lesson2 for the PSoc 2 training videos.
At 5:55 of lesson 2 I am unable to see the pin name "Pin_SW2" in the IO list as shown in IOLIST image attached!
I only see the pins from the previous project as shown in "Missing Input" image????
Does anyone know why I am not seeing the input pin... I have followed the lesson step by step!!!
I have redone this lesson countless times and I don't know what I am doing wrong??? It seems there is a discrepancy in lesson 2 of the PSoC creator video.
This discrepancy further makes the results of the workspace erroneous and thus can't really continue the lesson!
Please view video of the 1st anomaly by clicking link below!
Also, when the video goes to drag the Digital Input Pin onto the workspace, the pin is V2.10 in the video, but mine is V2.20???? I don't know if there is a version issue thats causing things to be different in the components catalog???
I'm trying to make my bootloadable applications reset automatically to the bootlaoder application after a certain period of time. The issue I'm having is that the timer that should reset this bootloadable applications to the bootloader must be in the bootloader application. Is there any way to have a timer working in the bootloader application after you bootload an app for that the reset occurs?
I load the applications with the CySmart, so the bootloader interface is a BLE device
Thank you in advanceShow Less
We have a product that uses the CYBLE-012011-00 with EZ-Serial 1.1.1 that is experiencing issues when sending data over CYSPP.
We are seeing an intermittent issue where it seems the module stops forwarding the data sent to it over UART while in CYSPP mode when connected to an Android Phone (OnePlus 7T Android 10). Usually, the first 2 or 3 packets sent over UART after sent over BLE but after that, there are no more packets. The module is not completely non-responsive, when the phone doesn't respond to the CYPSS packets, we enter API mode to disconnect which works and then we reenter CYSPP mode awaiting connections. Following connection attempts from the phone do not work either. I have verified that we are sending the same data over UART for the working and failing cases.
I have captured Wireshark logs a successful connection attempt and failing attempt and nothing stood out to me, an example of both is attached taken using the nRF sniffer firmware. See attached images (couldn't attach pcapng)
We do not see this issue when an nRF product connects to our Cypress module. Sometimes after the nRF product has connected, sent data and disconnected, the following phone connection works.
Is this issue related to 274727 mentioned here?
We are in the process of testing this on other Phones.Show Less