Re: [Paparazzi-devel] adc injected vs regular channels

[Piotr Esden-Tempski]

Does it really have problems with high count of periphs?

I implemented a test program to sample a bunch of channels in simultanous mode 
and it seems to be working fine.

Here is my implementation:
Driver: https://github.com/open-bldc/obldc2-firmware/blob/master/driver/adc.c
Test: https://github.com/open-bldc/obldc2-firmware/blob/master/test/adc_main.c

Regards,
Piotr

On Aug 2, 2013, at 9:27 AM, Stephen Dwyer <address@hidden> wrote:

> Hi Chris,
> 
> Yes, and I think the major reasons for injected was 1) it prioritizes 
> injected channels for very accurate timing of samples and 2) there is one 
> data buffer per injected channel, which means you can sample all four and 
> then move data out at the end, instead of either triggering an IRQ on each 
> channel completion or using a DMA (the DMAs seem to have problems running too 
> many peripherals at once...)
> 
> The only major disadvantage I see is that you can only sample 4 at once.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Stephen Dwyer
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Chris <address@hidden> wrote:
> Ok this is a very good reason :-)
> Chris
> 
> On 08/02/2013 01:17 PM, address@hidden wrote:
> I asked once the same question. As I understand, it was a <quick and dirty>
> solution to have a working ADC without bother about DMA. It is probably even
> somewhere in to do list.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel