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)
On the PC, COM23 is configured to 115200[baud], 8 (data bits), 1(stop bit).
I succeeded to send a packet to the PSOC and get a reply from the PSOC.
But it seems the rate is quite low.
Example: I sent 28 bytes to the PSOC and got 36 bytes from PSOC.
Expected: (28 + 36) * 8 = 64 bytes = 512 bits
The time required to send + receive should be: ~4.5msec
Actual: The elapsed time till I got a reply was much longer.
I've got a bit of a unique issue on a project that requires a USBUART bootloader. The bootload process itself I have no problem with, I have ...
I've got a bit of a unique issue on a project that requires a USBUART bootloader. The bootload process itself I have no problem with, I have loaded new firmware using the USBUART with no issue. Where the problem comes about it in regards to how application code on the host side deals with the sudden loss of the COM port when jumping to the bootloader and back to application code after loading.
Using the standard .NET System.IO.Ports, I can say for sure that it really REALLY does not appreciate the loss of a COM port during runtime. Not normally an issue with a hardware serial port since they don't normally disappear from the device list, but with USB UARTs this suddenly becomes a possibility, and becomes an issue for my bootloader host. Typically on a UART bootloader, I have a specific command that the PSoC receives that forces a call to Bootloadable_Load() which jumps it to the bootloader. The problem is the USB UART device will disappear from the list for a short time before it re-connects in the bootloader firmware. At this point the application can run into problems trying to use the port for the actual bootload process.
Maybe it's a longshot, but is there any possible way to prevent this loss of the PSoC5LP USB device when jumping to the bootloader? It would make things much smoother if possible.
We've gone past prototype and ready for production. Would like to know how to program our board with PSoC 5LP (10 pin) and PSoc 4 (5 pin) in producti...
We've gone past prototype and ready for production. Would like to know how to program our board with PSoC 5LP (10 pin) and PSoc 4 (5 pin) in production.
We've been using the MiniProg3 to program each board from PSoC Creator so far. But in production, we'd like to automate it. Ideally, we'd like to have a small computer as a host (Raspberry Pi?), write our programming utility on it and have it program the PSoC board.
AVR chips has avrdude that makes it possible to flash it from any host. Is there an equivalent for PSoC or can it be developed?
I have two questions:
1. Where can I find out timings for reading and writing to ports and registers including DMA transfers? I have a time-critical ...
I have two questions:
1. Where can I find out timings for reading and writing to ports and registers including DMA transfers? I have a time-critical application and want to know the numbers.
I ran a simple test to see how fast I could write to a pin using API write function, direct write to the port address, bit-banding; then writing to a control register connected to a pin. The results were surprising in that the bit-banding took more clock cycles than a direct write; also, the number of clock cycles jumped at 48MHz, from typically 6 to 14.
Clearly, this isn't a simple issue.
2. Regarding warnings about asynchronous paths: if I get a warning about an asynchronous input that is used as a clock on a D-type, this means that the D-type is actually clocked on the internal clock edge, not my external clock. Otherwise it wouldn't matter, no? If I use a Sync component, I'll lose another clock cycle: one to get through the Sync and the next to clock the D?
I think the Sync component is basically a D flip-flop anyway so, despite the warning, I get no benefit from using it and delay my signal unnecessarily.
I had to make the new question because the previous somebody marked it 'as solved', then, when I could return to this problem and asked the next subquestion, nobody see it because 'it is marked as solved', although it is far away of being really solved. I'd ask, Solved for who? If the person with the question can't handle the answer as something that solves the real problem, it is not solved.
So, excuse me for the delay. I'm now back with this problem. I hope CONSULTRON could continue helping me as he gave me the example I'm working with.
As I stated first, I need to move frequency about +- 12% from a frequency, that is a little lower than 5 KHz, in order to sustain some resonance on the system. i have seen what you sent, I understand that the clock was defined as the 8 bit period (256) multiplied by 5,000 Hertz, so you get a clock of 1.28 MHz. but as I need to move smoothly the frequency from the program (see the image freq_resonance attached), I see at first sight two posibilities:
1. To change the frequency on the clock with Clock_SetDividerValue(uint16 clkDivider) or
2. To change Period of the first PWM
The problem is that I don't know which values are elegible in case 1. and that the steps that would be available in case 2. are very wide (18.35 Hertz per step), and, if the range is about 564 Hertz for each side, with 30 steps I'll never can sustain resonance (I would correct from a derivative control factor, but if it doesn't work, it would become a PID algorithm). I think that the minimal step should be about 4 or 3 Hz. At the beginning, the program will scan the range until it finds the resonance frequency. The input for the program will be a sound, so when amplitude reach a peak, the program has to avoid loosing resonance moving frequency as needed. The resonance freq. could vary a little with rise of temp, the system has to make the changes needed, if amplitude begin to decrease, it has to oscilate slowly to verify on which direction it reaches the peak again (zero slope). I think that the green range, of about 500 Hz will be enough, but I'll know it until the experiment be phisically implemented.
Another thing that I want you to help me is the next: I have to sustanin resonance, but I want to read and display several sensors (a microphone, temp, presure, amp, volt, etc). How can I do all that? That is, I think I have to avoid to wait for response, it be a sensor, the display or whatever, so I think I would have to have a clock and each component would check if the delay time is reached for it, each round of the program, so for instance, it could send another data to display or it could read an ADC register if a flag is now on on each one. This way I don't interrupt the frequency generator. (supposing that it become stopped while a delay instruction is working) So, if You could help me to make clear this item I'd thank you a lot.
I have not reviewed the other example you gently sent me, but from a surface sight, I think that LUT can't comply with the requirement of min step here stated, but you can correct me if I'm wrong.
I wonder if, as it is marked as solved (I don't understand what for is that costume of setting as solved this), this question will be seen and attended. I hope it be...
Thank you again
I have checked the signal of the example in my psoc 5 and an image of it is attached as Fase1 y 2. That means that I have saved some obstacles until having it working. This is not much, but it is some advance. I'm going to put more time on this project in next weeks.
I have added a currently used project as a template with 'Set As Active Project' and then 'Copy To My Templates'. Regardless when I try to open a new ...
I have added a currently used project as a template with 'Set As Active Project' and then 'Copy To My Templates'. Regardless when I try to open a new project from the template, I don't see my project on the list of templates. When I try to create a new template from the same project, P. Creator warns me the template is already saved.
I have also tried to restart P. Creator and create a new project or add a new project (while in a workspace). Either way, the template never appears. What's the solution for this issue? The picture: there should be another template on the list.
NOTE: I have tried to save another project as template and it appeared on the list straight away. Is there a rule for templates? What am I missing here?
The PSoC® 5LP, PSoC 2 and PSoC 1 Forum discusses - 24-bit Digital Filter Block (DFB), 24 UDBs, DMA controller and integrating AFE, digital logic with user interface ICs with an Arm Cortex-M3 CPU solutions.