Subject:
|
Re: Brainstorms
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 13 Aug 2002 15:52:50 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Matt Lawrence <matt@#StopSpammers#technoronin.com>
|
Viewed:
|
1055 times
|
| |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Aug 2002, Wayne Gramlich wrote:
>
> The I2C bus is not really designed to support a bus scan.
> I'm not saying it can't be done, but I certainly haven't
> figured out how to do it. Until I see somebody who gives
> an extremely detailed description of how they do it, I will
> remain extremely skeptical. No offense is intended here.
Since I had to support hot-pluggable devices on the bus (not my idea), I
had to continually scan the bus. Unfortunately, that was several years
ago and I don't remember all of the details. It took either a zero-length
read or a zero-length write followed by a check to see if the clock line
was being held by the slave device. It worked well and seemed to be very
reliable, I had continuous scans running for weeks at a time on some
systems.
-- Matt
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Brainstorms
|
| Hi, (...) Weird idea ... (...) It's way simpler: You just send the address and wait for the acknowledged via the data line. Then you just don't continue ... you don't even need read access to the clock line for this. IMHO something that can carry (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Brainstorms
|
| (...) [snip Philips uC] (...) The I2C bus is not really designed to support a bus scan. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I certainly haven't figured out how to do it. Until I see somebody who gives an extremely detailed description of how they (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
53 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
