Yahoo Groups archive

Lpc2000

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:31 UTC

Thread

NC pins, X2 buffer, SPI LCD.

NC pins, X2 buffer, SPI LCD.

2004-12-04 by karldalen

Is it safe to use the NC pins as bypass
for other signals routed on the PCB?
Can it disturbe due to a supposed short 
lenght antenna function into the chip?

Have anyone seen SPI driven 2 by 16 LCD
"chip on glas" (no piggy back) modules,
cheap, easy, neat and dandy available in
europe?

Are the X2 buffer output capable to drive
one HC/LV input wihtout screwing up the
frequency or skewing clock edges?

Heard in the grape wine:
ARM is changing name to Cortex and in 
action of the course lobotymng them selfs
by doing so!!

Reg
KD

ARM - Cortex

2004-12-04 by lpc2100_fan

Hi Karl,
recently listened to a short presentation at the ARM developpers forum
about Cortex. Cortex is suppossed to be the microcontroller core of
the future from ARM. It is smaller, less power, supports Thumb2 but
can not run existing ARM or Thumb code (needs recompile). 
So, there are many advantages but it will take at least 1-2 years for
the first devices to arrive with this core. 
ARM will remain ARM but they try to stop "numbering" the cores like
ARM7, ARM9, they start giving them names like Cortex. 
Hope this clarifies the Cortex - ARM confusion.
Cheers, Bob

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> Is it safe to use the NC pins as bypass
> for other signals routed on the PCB?
> Can it disturbe due to a supposed short 
> lenght antenna function into the chip?
> 
> Have anyone seen SPI driven 2 by 16 LCD
> "chip on glas" (no piggy back) modules,
> cheap, easy, neat and dandy available in
> europe?
> 
> Are the X2 buffer output capable to drive
> one HC/LV input wihtout screwing up the
> frequency or skewing clock edges?
> 
> Heard in the grape wine:
> ARM is changing name to Cortex and in 
> action of the course lobotymng them selfs
> by doing so!!
> 
> Reg
> KD

RE: [lpc2000] ARM - Cortex

2004-12-04 by Tim Thornton

Hi Bob,

Almost! You're describing the Cortex-M3 processor well. However, other
processor cores will appear in the Cortex range which will support ARM
and Thumb instructions. The M3 is designed for deeply embedded
processors; because of the need to keep chip costs down in this market
it only supports Thumb-2, which means the design can be smaller so take
up less area.

There's a short introduction to the Cortex family at
http://www.arm.com/products/CPUs/families/CortexFamily.html

I also hope this helps clear things up!

Cheers,
Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lpc2100_fan [mailto:lpc2100_fan@...]
> Sent: 04 December 2004 06:41
> To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [lpc2000] ARM - Cortex
> 
> Hi Karl,
> recently listened to a short presentation at the ARM developpers forum
> about Cortex. Cortex is suppossed to be the microcontroller core of
> the future from ARM. It is smaller, less power, supports Thumb2 but
> can not run existing ARM or Thumb code (needs recompile).
> So, there are many advantages but it will take at least 1-2 years for
> the first devices to arrive with this core.
> ARM will remain ARM but they try to stop "numbering" the cores like
> ARM7, ARM9, they start giving them names like Cortex.
> Hope this clarifies the Cortex - ARM confusion.
> Cheers, Bob
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...> wrote:
> >
> > Is it safe to use the NC pins as bypass
> > for other signals routed on the PCB?
> > Can it disturbe due to a supposed short
> > lenght antenna function into the chip?
> >
> > Have anyone seen SPI driven 2 by 16 LCD
> > "chip on glas" (no piggy back) modules,
> > cheap, easy, neat and dandy available in
> > europe?
> >
> > Are the X2 buffer output capable to drive
> > one HC/LV input wihtout screwing up the
> > frequency or skewing clock edges?
> >
> > Heard in the grape wine:
> > ARM is changing name to Cortex and in
> > action of the course lobotymng them selfs
> > by doing so!!
> >
> > Reg
> > KD
> 

-- 
This e-mail message is intended for the addressee(s) only and may
contain 
information that is the property of, and/or subject to a confidentiality

agreement between the intended recipient(s), their organisation and/or
the 
ARM Group of Companies. If you are not an intended recipient of this 
e-mail message, you should not read, copy, forward or otherwise
distribute 
or further disclose the information in it; misuse of the contents of
this 
e-mail message may violate various laws in your state, country or 
jurisdiction. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please 
contact the originator of this e-mail message via e-mail and delete all 
copies of this message from your computer or network, thank you.

Re: ARM - Cortex

2004-12-04 by karldalen

Hi bob and Tim!

The grape wine is also saying that the ARM instruction
set (ie the core will dissaper) will be abandoned!!
And that ARM will do as Motorola did, ie selling off 
to create On semiconductor, Freescale, or like Siemens
doing Inefenineon, etc, ARM changes to Cortex!!!

Thats what is heard trough the grape wine, not 
what i say im just one ear in the grape wine!
Its just roumurs so i dont have the slightest clue!

Anyhow in my oppinion abandoning the brand name
"ARM"  for Cortex is not the cleverest thing to do!!
In any bussiness name is important!

Imagine Intel changes to "Bananas inc" or Shit inc, or
Coca Cola to ICM! (Imperialistic Capitalist Murders inc!!)
That would raise a eyebrow or two! :-)

Otherwise that that i like the LPC2106! I just wished
it had  a 8-12 bit ADC in it! 

Best regards
KD


--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Thornton" <tim.thornton@a...> 
wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> 
> Almost! You're describing the Cortex-M3 processor well. However, 
other
> processor cores will appear in the Cortex range which will support 
ARM
> and Thumb instructions. The M3 is designed for deeply embedded
> processors; because of the need to keep chip costs down in this 
market
> it only supports Thumb-2, which means the design can be smaller so 
take
> up less area.
> 
> There's a short introduction to the Cortex family at
> http://www.arm.com/products/CPUs/families/CortexFamily.html
> 
> I also hope this helps clear things up!
> 
> Cheers,
> Tim
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lpc2100_fan [mailto:lpc2100_fan@y...]
> > Sent: 04 December 2004 06:41
> > To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [lpc2000] ARM - Cortex
> > 
> > Hi Karl,
> > recently listened to a short presentation at the ARM developpers 
forum
> > about Cortex. Cortex is suppossed to be the microcontroller core 
of
> > the future from ARM. It is smaller, less power, supports Thumb2 
but
> > can not run existing ARM or Thumb code (needs recompile).
> > So, there are many advantages but it will take at least 1-2 years 
for
> > the first devices to arrive with this core.
> > ARM will remain ARM but they try to stop "numbering" the cores 
like
> > ARM7, ARM9, they start giving them names like Cortex.
> > Hope this clarifies the Cortex - ARM confusion.
> > Cheers, Bob
> > 
> > --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...> 
wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it safe to use the NC pins as bypass
> > > for other signals routed on the PCB?
> > > Can it disturbe due to a supposed short
> > > lenght antenna function into the chip?
> > >
> > > Have anyone seen SPI driven 2 by 16 LCD
> > > "chip on glas" (no piggy back) modules,
> > > cheap, easy, neat and dandy available in
> > > europe?
> > >
> > > Are the X2 buffer output capable to drive
> > > one HC/LV input wihtout screwing up the
> > > frequency or skewing clock edges?
> > >
> > > Heard in the grape wine:
> > > ARM is changing name to Cortex and in
> > > action of the course lobotymng them selfs
> > > by doing so!!
> > >
> > > Reg
> > > KD
> > 
> 
> -- 
> This e-mail message is intended for the addressee(s) only and may
> contain 
> information that is the property of, and/or subject to a 
confidentiality
> 
> agreement between the intended recipient(s), their organisation 
and/or
> the 
> ARM Group of Companies. If you are not an intended recipient of 
this 
> e-mail message, you should not read, copy, forward or otherwise
> distribute 
> or further disclose the information in it; misuse of the contents of
> this 
> e-mail message may violate various laws in your state, country or 
> jurisdiction. If you have received this e-mail message in error, 
please 
> contact the originator of this e-mail message via e-mail and delete 
all 
> copies of this message from your computer or network, thank you.

Re: ARM - Cortex

2004-12-04 by karldalen

Hi bob and Tim!

The grape wine is also saying that the ARM instruction
set (ie the core will dissaper) will be abandoned!!
And that ARM will do as Motorola did, ie selling off 
to create On semiconductor, Freescale, or like Siemens
doing Inefenineon, etc, ARM changes to Cortex!!!

Thats what is heard trough the grape wine, not 
what i say im just one ear in the grape wine!
Its just roumurs so i dont have the slightest clue!

Anyhow in my oppinion abandoning the brand name
"ARM"  for Cortex is not the cleverest thing to do!!
In any bussiness name is important!

Imagine Intel changes to "Bananas inc" or Shit inc, or
Coca Cola to ICM! (Imperialistic Capitalist Murders inc!!)
That would raise a eyebrow or two! :-)

Otherwise that that i like the LPC2106! I just wished
it had  a 8-12 bit ADC in it! 

Best regards
KD


--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Thornton" <tim.thornton@a...> 
wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> 
> Almost! You're describing the Cortex-M3 processor well. However, 
other
> processor cores will appear in the Cortex range which will support 
ARM
> and Thumb instructions. The M3 is designed for deeply embedded
> processors; because of the need to keep chip costs down in this 
market
> it only supports Thumb-2, which means the design can be smaller so 
take
> up less area.
> 
> There's a short introduction to the Cortex family at
> http://www.arm.com/products/CPUs/families/CortexFamily.html
> 
> I also hope this helps clear things up!
> 
> Cheers,
> Tim
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: lpc2100_fan [mailto:lpc2100_fan@y...]
> > Sent: 04 December 2004 06:41
> > To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [lpc2000] ARM - Cortex
> > 
> > Hi Karl,
> > recently listened to a short presentation at the ARM developpers 
forum
> > about Cortex. Cortex is suppossed to be the microcontroller core 
of
> > the future from ARM. It is smaller, less power, supports Thumb2 
but
> > can not run existing ARM or Thumb code (needs recompile).
> > So, there are many advantages but it will take at least 1-2 years 
for
> > the first devices to arrive with this core.
> > ARM will remain ARM but they try to stop "numbering" the cores 
like
> > ARM7, ARM9, they start giving them names like Cortex.
> > Hope this clarifies the Cortex - ARM confusion.
> > Cheers, Bob
> > 
> > --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...> 
wrote:
> > >
> > > Is it safe to use the NC pins as bypass
> > > for other signals routed on the PCB?
> > > Can it disturbe due to a supposed short
> > > lenght antenna function into the chip?
> > >
> > > Have anyone seen SPI driven 2 by 16 LCD
> > > "chip on glas" (no piggy back) modules,
> > > cheap, easy, neat and dandy available in
> > > europe?
> > >
> > > Are the X2 buffer output capable to drive
> > > one HC/LV input wihtout screwing up the
> > > frequency or skewing clock edges?
> > >
> > > Heard in the grape wine:
> > > ARM is changing name to Cortex and in
> > > action of the course lobotymng them selfs
> > > by doing so!!
> > >
> > > Reg
> > > KD
> > 
> 
> -- 
> This e-mail message is intended for the addressee(s) only and may
> contain 
> information that is the property of, and/or subject to a 
confidentiality
> 
> agreement between the intended recipient(s), their organisation 
and/or
> the 
> ARM Group of Companies. If you are not an intended recipient of 
this 
> e-mail message, you should not read, copy, forward or otherwise
> distribute 
> or further disclose the information in it; misuse of the contents of
> this 
> e-mail message may violate various laws in your state, country or 
> jurisdiction. If you have received this e-mail message in error, 
please 
> contact the originator of this e-mail message via e-mail and delete 
all 
> copies of this message from your computer or network, thank you.

RE: [lpc2000] Re: ARM - Cortex

2004-12-04 by Tim Thornton

Hello Karl

If that's true, the grape vine is better informed than I am! Abandoning
the ARM ISA is not something I'm aware of. Motorola and Siemens span out
their semiconductor business; they have other business in their
portfolio. ARM is only semiconductor, so it would not be possible for us
to spin that business out.

We are certainly not abandoning the ARM brand name. The proper title of
the new processor is the ARM Cortex-M3. I'm not in marketing, but I
believe the decision to name the processor family was to prevent
confusion between core names and architectures. The ARM V7 architecture
sounds too much like ARM7! Speaking of Intel, I would argue a better
comparison is their change from the 80486 to Pentium than from Intel to
Bananas Inc.

Enjoy tinkering!

Tim
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> -----Original Message-----
> From: karldalen [mailto:karldalen@...]
> Sent: 04 December 2004 22:40
> To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [lpc2000] Re: ARM - Cortex
> 
> 
> 
> Hi bob and Tim!
> 
> The grape wine is also saying that the ARM instruction
> set (ie the core will dissaper) will be abandoned!!
> And that ARM will do as Motorola did, ie selling off
> to create On semiconductor, Freescale, or like Siemens
> doing Inefenineon, etc, ARM changes to Cortex!!!
> 
> Thats what is heard trough the grape wine, not
> what i say im just one ear in the grape wine!
> Its just roumurs so i dont have the slightest clue!
> 
> Anyhow in my oppinion abandoning the brand name
> "ARM"  for Cortex is not the cleverest thing to do!!
> In any bussiness name is important!
> 
> Imagine Intel changes to "Bananas inc" or Shit inc, or
> Coca Cola to ICM! (Imperialistic Capitalist Murders inc!!)
> That would raise a eyebrow or two! :-)
> 
> Otherwise that that i like the LPC2106! I just wished
> it had  a 8-12 bit ADC in it!
> 
> Best regards
> KD
> 
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Thornton" <tim.thornton@a...>
> wrote:
> > Hi Bob,
> >
> > Almost! You're describing the Cortex-M3 processor well. However,
> other
> > processor cores will appear in the Cortex range which will support
> ARM
> > and Thumb instructions. The M3 is designed for deeply embedded
> > processors; because of the need to keep chip costs down in this
> market
> > it only supports Thumb-2, which means the design can be smaller so
> take
> > up less area.
> >
> > There's a short introduction to the Cortex family at
> > http://www.arm.com/products/CPUs/families/CortexFamily.html
> >
> > I also hope this helps clear things up!
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Tim
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: lpc2100_fan [mailto:lpc2100_fan@y...]
> > > Sent: 04 December 2004 06:41
> > > To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [lpc2000] ARM - Cortex
> > >
> > > Hi Karl,
> > > recently listened to a short presentation at the ARM developpers
> forum
> > > about Cortex. Cortex is suppossed to be the microcontroller core
> of
> > > the future from ARM. It is smaller, less power, supports Thumb2
> but
> > > can not run existing ARM or Thumb code (needs recompile).
> > > So, there are many advantages but it will take at least 1-2 years
> for
> > > the first devices to arrive with this core.
> > > ARM will remain ARM but they try to stop "numbering" the cores
> like
> > > ARM7, ARM9, they start giving them names like Cortex.
> > > Hope this clarifies the Cortex - ARM confusion.
> > > Cheers, Bob
> > >
> > > --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Is it safe to use the NC pins as bypass
> > > > for other signals routed on the PCB?
> > > > Can it disturbe due to a supposed short
> > > > lenght antenna function into the chip?
> > > >
> > > > Have anyone seen SPI driven 2 by 16 LCD
> > > > "chip on glas" (no piggy back) modules,
> > > > cheap, easy, neat and dandy available in
> > > > europe?
> > > >
> > > > Are the X2 buffer output capable to drive
> > > > one HC/LV input wihtout screwing up the
> > > > frequency or skewing clock edges?
> > > >
> > > > Heard in the grape wine:
> > > > ARM is changing name to Cortex and in
> > > > action of the course lobotymng them selfs
> > > > by doing so!!
> > > >
> > > > Reg
> > > > KD
> > >
> >
> > --
> > This e-mail message is intended for the addressee(s) only and may
> > contain
> > information that is the property of, and/or subject to a
> confidentiality
> >
> > agreement between the intended recipient(s), their organisation
> and/or
> > the
> > ARM Group of Companies. If you are not an intended recipient of
> this
> > e-mail message, you should not read, copy, forward or otherwise
> > distribute
> > or further disclose the information in it; misuse of the contents of
> > this
> > e-mail message may violate various laws in your state, country or
> > jurisdiction. If you have received this e-mail message in error,
> please
> > contact the originator of this e-mail message via e-mail and delete
> all
> > copies of this message from your computer or network, thank you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Re: ARM - Cortex

2004-12-05 by karldalen

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Thornton" <tim.thornton@a...> 
wrote:
> Hello Karl
> 
> If that's true, the grape vine is better informed than I am! 
>Abandoning > the ARM ISA is not something I'm aware of. Motorola and 
>Siemens span out  their semiconductor business; they have other 
>business in their  portfolio. ARM is only semiconductor, so it would 
>not be possible for us  to spin that business out.

One canot rely on the grape vine obvioulsy, but odd things seams
tho have hapend, a colleague had just read about the ARM 
name "abandonment" in one large electronics industry paper!!
 
> We are certainly not abandoning the ARM brand name. 

That seams sound, but it seams that something has not
been right in marketing or in the contact with the
industry journalists or simply the journalists
goofed again!!   

>The proper title of
>the new processor is the ARM Cortex-M3. I'm not in marketing, but I
>believe the decision to name the processor family was to prevent
>confusion between core names and architectures. The ARM V7 
>architecture
>sounds too much like ARM7!

Well , what about ARM C7! 
Anyhow, its a bit silly this naming thing of products,
does it in reality sell less or more whatever the 
name are! Would Intel had sold less or more Pentium
if the name had been Sexium, or Septium?

>Speaking of Intel, I would argue a better
>comparison is their change from the 80486 to
>Pentium than from Intel to Bananas Inc.

As long as the grape grape vine was talking about
product name, yes i agree, but the g-vine was also
about change of company name too!

I still like Bananas Inc instead if Intel! :-)

Reg
KD

RE: [lpc2000] Re: ARM - Cortex

2004-12-05 by Tim Thornton

Hiya

> -----Original Message-----
> From: karldalen [mailto:karldalen@yahoo.se]
> Sent: 05 December 2004 01:01
> To: lpc2000@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [lpc2000] Re: ARM - Cortex
> 
> 
> One canot rely on the grape vine obvioulsy, but odd things seams
> tho have hapend, a colleague had just read about the ARM
> name "abandonment" in one large electronics industry paper!!

Oh... might I ask which paper?
 
> > We are certainly not abandoning the ARM brand name.
> 
> That seams sound, but it seams that something has not
> been right in marketing or in the contact with the
> industry journalists or simply the journalists
> goofed again!!

:) Well, I'll see if I can find the right person at ARM to forward the
"abandonment" article to.

> Well, what about ARM C7!
> Anyhow, its a bit silly this naming thing of products,
> does it in reality sell less or more whatever the
> name are! Would Intel had sold less or more Pentium
> if the name had been Sexium, or Septium?

I'm not so sure the choice of name is the important thing. It's the
removal of ambiguity that will make our lives easier, if nothing else.
 
> >Speaking of Intel, I would argue a better
> >comparison is their change from the 80486 to
> >Pentium than from Intel to Bananas Inc.
> 
> As long as the grape grape vine was talking about
> product name, yes i agree, but the g-vine was also
> about change of company name too!
> 
> I still like Bananas Inc instead if Intel! :-)

Of course, they would have to make sure they didn't slip up on their new
name... 

Tim

-- 
This e-mail message is intended for the addressee(s) only and may
contain 
information that is the property of, and/or subject to a confidentiality

agreement between the intended recipient(s), their organisation and/or
the 
ARM Group of Companies. If you are not an intended recipient of this 
e-mail message, you should not read, copy, forward or otherwise
distribute 
or further disclose the information in it; misuse of the contents of
this 
e-mail message may violate various laws in your state, country or 
jurisdiction. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please 
contact the originator of this e-mail message via e-mail and delete all 
copies of this message from your computer or network, thank you.

RE: [lpc2000] Re: ARM - Cortex

2004-12-05 by Paul Curtis

Karl, Tom, 

> Well , what about ARM C7! 
> Anyhow, its a bit silly this naming thing of products, does 
> it in reality sell less or more whatever the name are! Would 
> Intel had sold less or more Pentium if the name had been 
> Sexium, or Septium?

Perhaps Intel should have named their Itania-style processors "Sexium"
rather than "Itanium" to garner some support as the follow-on to
Pentium--then they might have sold more of the Itanium (sorry,
"Sexium")!

Just think of all the great chat-up lines that could foster!

--
Paul Curtis, Rowley Associates Ltd http://www.rowley.co.uk
CrossWorks for MSP430, ARM, and (soon) Atmel AVR processors

Pin Config registers!

2004-12-08 by karldalen

Simple question!

Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
the SPI interface are enabled? I need to use the SPI in 3
pin master mode and overide the SSEL function by using
that port pin as a GP I/O?

Since configuration are pin based and therefore it
should work even then that the manual says nothing
specific about the SSEL function! No?

Reg
KD

Re: [lpc2000] Pin Config registers!

2004-12-09 by Sridhar gadda

hello Karldalen, 
 
                           I too noticed the same problem for my SPI interface ....in Manual its not specified about using 2 or more slaves using SSLE pin. Which register name u r using for defining your spi interface ..S0SPCR or SPI0_SPCR ? I used S0SPCR but I didn't see clcok singnal at SCK0 using oscilloscope.
 
 Waiting for your reply.
 
 Regards 
 
 Sridhar
 
     

karldalen <karldalen@...> wrote:

Simple question!

Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
the SPI interface are enabled? I need to use the SPI in 3
pin master mode and overide the SSEL function by using
that port pin as a GP I/O?

Since configuration are pin based and therefore it
should work even then that the manual says nothing
specific about the SSEL function! No?

Reg
KD




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
Get unlimited calls to

U.S./Canada


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 All your favorites on one personal page � Try My Yahoo!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Pin Config registers!

2004-12-09 by rattencremesuppe

Hi,

> Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
> the SPI interface are enabled?

Its the other way around - SPI doesn't work, when SSEL is configured
as GPIO.
You MUST enable the SSEL function on that pin in order to use SPI.

They even mentioned it in the manual:
"Note: LPC2114/2124/2212/2214 configured to operate as SPI master MUST
select SSEL
functionality on an apropriate pin and have HIGH level on this pin in
order to act as a
master."

LPC2114/2124/2212/2214
USER MANUAL, p. 163

This pin is wasted, if you want to do master mode SPI :-(

> I need to use the SPI in 3
> pin master mode and overide the SSEL function by using
> that port pin as a GP I/O?

Not possible, AFAIK

HTH,
Patrick

Re: [lpc2000] Re: Pin Config registers!

2004-12-09 by Sridhar gadda

Hi
 
 "Note: LPC2114/2124/2212/2214 configured to operate as SPI master MUST
select SSEL
functionality on an apropriate pin and have HIGH level on this pin in
order to act as a
master."
   
    what about 2129 ?????????? 

rattencremesuppe <spam@...> wrote:

Hi,

> Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
> the SPI interface are enabled?

Its the other way around - SPI doesn't work, when SSEL is configured
as GPIO.
You MUST enable the SSEL function on that pin in order to use SPI.

They even mentioned it in the manual:
"Note: LPC2114/2124/2212/2214 configured to operate as SPI master MUST
select SSEL
functionality on an apropriate pin and have HIGH level on this pin in
order to act as a
master."

LPC2114/2124/2212/2214
USER MANUAL, p. 163

This pin is wasted, if you want to do master mode SPI :-(

> I need to use the SPI in 3
> pin master mode and overide the SSEL function by using
> that port pin as a GP I/O?

Not possible, AFAIK

HTH,
Patrick




Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lpc2000/
  
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpc2000-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
  
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Pin Config registers!

2004-12-09 by rattencremesuppe

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Sridhar gadda <sridhargadda@y...>
wrote:
>  Hi
>  
>  "Note: LPC2114/2124/2212/2214 configured to operate as SPI master
MUST
> select SSEL
> functionality on an apropriate pin and have HIGH level on this pin
in
> order to act as a
> master."
>    
>     what about 2129 ?????????? 

2129 is like 2124 with CAN. so the SPI section should be identical.

HTH,
Patrick

Re: Pin Config registers!

2004-12-10 by philips_apps

Hello KD,

in case you are using a LPC2131/2132/2138 as the master device on 
your SPI bus, you can configure the pin hosting SSEL function to 
perform a GPIO or some other non-SPI related function. Your SPI 
peripheral will run just fine.

However, for all other currently available LPC2000 devices the SSEL 
pin must be configured as the SPI SSEL pin and tied via a pull-up to 
3.3V. As you can see, older LPC2000 microcontrollers are always 
using SPI's SSEL once the SPI is enabled: masters to detect presence 
of another master on the bus and slaves as the select line. If you 
choose non-LPC213x device and configure its SPI module to be the 
master but select a function different from the SSEL on the 
corresponding pin, the SPI module will switch to the slave mode.

Regards,

philips_apps

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> Simple question!
> 
> Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
> the SPI interface are enabled? I need to use the SPI in 3
> pin master mode and overide the SSEL function by using
> that port pin as a GP I/O?
> 
> Since configuration are pin based and therefore it
> should work even then that the manual says nothing
> specific about the SSEL function! No?
> 
> Reg
> KD

Re: Pin Config registers!

2004-12-10 by dalenkarl

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "philips_apps" <philips_apps@y...> 
wrote:

Thanks for clarifying the situation.

Regards
KD
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 
> Hello KD,
> 
> in case you are using a LPC2131/2132/2138 as the master device on 
> your SPI bus, you can configure the pin hosting SSEL function to 
> perform a GPIO or some other non-SPI related function. Your SPI 
> peripheral will run just fine.
> 
> However, for all other currently available LPC2000 devices the SSEL 
> pin must be configured as the SPI SSEL pin and tied via a pull-up to 
> 3.3V. As you can see, older LPC2000 microcontrollers are always 
> using SPI's SSEL once the SPI is enabled: masters to detect presence 
> of another master on the bus and slaves as the select line. If you 
> choose non-LPC213x device and configure its SPI module to be the 
> master but select a function different from the SSEL on the 
> corresponding pin, the SPI module will switch to the slave mode.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> philips_apps
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "karldalen" <karldalen@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Simple question!
> > 
> > Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
> > the SPI interface are enabled? I need to use the SPI in 3
> > pin master mode and overide the SSEL function by using
> > that port pin as a GP I/O?
> > 
> > Since configuration are pin based and therefore it
> > should work even then that the manual says nothing
> > specific about the SSEL function! No?
> > 
> > Reg
> > K

Re: Pin Config registers!

2004-12-10 by dalenkarl

--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "rattencremesuppe" <spam@p...> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > Does the SSEL pin function overide the GPio function when
> > the SPI interface are enabled?
> 
> Its the other way around - SPI doesn't work, when SSEL is configured
> as GPIO.
> You MUST enable the SSEL function on that pin in order to use SPI.

Im using the LPC2106, pin config register dissabels SPI entierly.  
Massage to Philips..."Lousy done "!!

Anyhow ,thanks for clarification on the matter.

Reg
KD

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.