Lpc2000

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "jayasooriah" <jayasooriah@...> 
> I would not change my view.  I would move on to a processor chip 
that
> does not have this type of nastiness.

[..AND..]

> If NEC recommends that you needs to use the watchdog timer to 
recover
> from UART lockups that cannot be recovered by software, my advice 
to
> you is to move on to another vendor.  The market is full of 
alternatives.

[..AND..}

> If a manufacture tells you it is to break hardware deadlocks, my
> advice is that you move on to one that does not.

[..AND..]

> If a peripheral locks up and cannot be recovered by re-
initialisation,
> it is time to move on.

No need to say the same thing four times: they all miss the point in 
any case.

The point isn't that a peripheral is known to lock up (in fact, I'm 
not aware any of the LPC2xxx peripherals that exhibit this 
bevahiour), the point is that there is a risk that such a problem 
may be present and as yet undiscovered. These deveices are just too 
complex, and the systems in which they operate so numerous as to 
make a guarentee of the possibility virtually impossible.

Knowing this risk exists, I've learnt from both my own and others 
experience that the best thing to do when a watchdog expires is to 
reset everything back to a known state, and then re-configure as 
required. If this is what the watchdog does, then great.

If there's some counter argument (as to why it might be prefereble 
not to reset back to a known state), I'd love to hear it.

I believe it is always a good strategy to learn from others often 
hard-one experience.

Brendan