I have the following protocols to support TTL interface with some external components (SkyTech M1 Mini or M1 RFID scanner) I am trying to, the SPI or the ICC, I am thinking of which route you would recommend. App processing time (a continuous gesture matching algorithm) is very much needed and expensive.
Any links or sources on the subject will be appreciated.
I found the helpful links:
TTL:
- Thank you for your help.
:
If it helps in the device which I am trying to interface with the interface then SkyTek and. Platform / cpu is the sun
From TTL means you mean UART (where a peripheral receives / sends a serial stream automatically Out) or bitbanging (where do you manually set / reset / toggle bits)?
I would probably recommend SPI this is a relatively easy protocol, and on the master side, if you have to, you can make it a little bit bumpy. (But using the built-in SPI peripherals is much easier.) The SPI Master sends a clock line (SCLK) and a data line (MOSI = Master Out Slave), where data bits are valid on the nominated edge of the clock; It receives a data line (MISO = Master Slave Out) from DAS where the data bit is valid on the designated edge of the clock line. If you have many slaves, then the technique is usually to choose a chip (CS) line for each slave; If CS is less then slave is active in the question, otherwise it should ignore the clock / data signals and should not disturb the MISO line. The SPI is simple and even a HC 594 or HC5595 will work with the output register (SOC to SOCL, SCK, TC from RC to CS), if your microcontroller output is low on the port pin and you have some extra people Required if you have more than 3 SPI devices, different device from a group of address bits to create CS lines as HC 138 and microprocessor as a decoder A. Consider using master chip select line. (Since only one CS line is considered low at a time)
I2C is a pain. The main advantage of this is that you can do everything in two stars (+ power and land) which is shared in a group of external devices. But you have to be aware of a dispute and a part of other things. It is also slower than SPI and open collector line, hence its power consumption + noise immunity is related to you, where you use for pull resistance (or current sources).
A UART's fastest solution may be the speed limit regarding the promotion time of the SPI round trip, because the two sides use the same clock signal. (Signal path = Master SCL pin changes, slave sees it, and MISO responds by changing PIN, then master uses MISO signal on the edge of next SCL so that signals from DAS have been reached.) In an UART incoming and outgoing The bitstream is free, and latency does not mean that until the high-level protocol UART is sent to UART endpoint A to send commands to endpoint B, B Wait for the answer, and then send the next command. In fact, fast serial currents should be considered to be used to maintain signal integrity. But UAT bytes have a pain compared to the parsing spi; There are clearly demarcated packets in the SPI, whereas in UARS you are working with an unchanged serial stream and any packing is to be done by parsing the data.
Edit: Another plus with UART, the processor can automatically handle large sender / received buffers, so that your program can be queued to a large number of bytes to be sent. , And then parse a group of received bytes when you do so. Hardware can handle the immediacy of sending / receiving each individual byte, and worrying about your program different bytes can free your program, when your program is doing something else.
Comments
Post a Comment