Lpc2000

At 05:07 AM 11/23/03 +1100, you wrote:
>The 2nd question is, what if I write at a slower rate to VPB ?
>Do I still need the fastest pclk for my I/O pins to update as fast as 
>possible ?????
>(I can't trace :-)
>
>As an example, C code generating this sequence :
>.......
>STR     R4,[R7,#0]            P0.0 set to "1"
>MOV    R4,#1
>STR     R4,[R0,#0]            P0.0 set to "0"
>......
>
>Takes :
>1.6 uS (16 cclks) with pclk = 4 cclks
>1.0 uS (10 cclks) with pclk = 2 cclks
>0.8 uS (8 cclks)  with pclk = 1 cclks
>
>(that's what I measure here on HW)
>
>Is there anyone that can shed some light on this ?
>
>
>
>toggling P0.0 with pclk = cclk/4
>
>
>-- Kris
><http://www.microbit.com.au>www.microbit.com.au
>

I was going to play with bus optimization next anyway so I thought I'd 
measure the results and pass them along.

All of these with a 10MHz clock PLL'd to 60MHz.

MAM Off
ASM optimized 1.06uS period ~740nS on ~330nS off
C  1.8uS period ~800ns on ~1uS off

MAM on, Access to flash at recommended 3 cycles, VPB divider at default.
ASM optimized near square wave with 600nS period
C near square wave with 736nS period

MAM on , Access to flash at recommended 3 cycles, , VPB divider to 1
ASM optimized 264nS period ~168nS off ~118nS on
C near square wave with 416nS period

The (hand) optimized assembly loop used is

         mov     r3, #256
         ldr     r2, .L67+32
         ldr     r4, .L67+36
.L64:
         str     r3, [r2, #0]
         str     r3, [r4, #0]
         b       .L64

If the output is instruction rate limited then I would expect an output 
with an approx 2/3 duty cycle.  That is only approached for the first 
case.  For all other cases there is clearly some time taken up with I/O.

Also clearly getting maximum throughput will depend on setting up the bus 
'correctly'.

Setting the VPB divider to 1 in this configuration also seems to have an 
effect on the UART.   I haven't figured that out yet but what should be 
9600 baud drops to about 9000 baud.

Robert Adsett