Strictly necessary cookies are on by default and cannot be turned off. Functional, Performance and Tracking/targeting/sharing cookies can be turned on below based on your preferences (this banner will remain available for you to accept cookies). You may change your cookie settings by deleting cookies from your browser. Then this banner will appear again. You can learn more details about cookies HERE.
Strictly necessary (always on)
Functional, Performance and Tracking/targeting/sharing (default off)
I use Full mailboxes with the FIFO functionality and I want to have 4 FIFOs in total. Consequently, I link receive mailboxes 0 to 3, 4 to 7, 8 to 11 and 12 to 15 together. Then I set the following IDs for the four groups: 0x10B, 0x30B, 0x50B, 0x70B. IDE is 0 since I want to communicate with 11-bit-COB-IDs. Every configuration until now is done with the GUI.
If I run my program and print the contents of my ACR/AMR register to the LCD they do not match my GUI configurations (e.g. the IDE bit is set in the ACR). Why is that? Further, although they are linked together, mailboxes of the same group seem to have slightly different ACR/AMR configurations. Do they simply not apply in the FIFO case or what am I doing wrong?
Thanks for your answer. I'm sorry I can't publish my source code. But anyway, I think I was accessing the registers in a wrong way, that's why I came up with the question in the headline. Now the AMR and ACR registers behave like they should!
(just another tip for people working on that, too: when writing these registers it is highly recommended to use the RXRegisterInit function, otherwise strange side-effects will occur)