Obviously, lower rail voltages can make this even more of issue. In their most basic forms, all of these busses are "ground referenced".and can suffer from system induced noise. CRC (optional) and higher data rates can be supported (up to 5Mbits.) It does have cons, namely bus capacitance can limit actual data rates (rise/fall time) but generally you can design around this "problem". It has an addressing scheme, can send commands, and can support 0 or more data frames in a transaction. I2C is also a two pin interface and is an actual "standard" developed by Phillips (now NXP.) As a standard, it is well-defined in how it operates, how errors are raised, and is simple to implement. I generally consider the lack of a true standard for SPI to be a "con". SPI is a "de-facto" aning it can vary in implementation.your mileage may vary depending on how a IC supplier defined "their" SPI implementation. SPI is a master-slave relationship and can be a faster interface (I've seen up to 60MHz clock rates, not common) but it also requires more pins, 3 at a minimum for a point-to-point communication scheme but the number of pins increases to 3+n as the number of "slaves" increases above 1. Master and slave are not specifically defined. #I2C VS UART PERFORMANCE SERIAL#Unless you are implementing a serial port connection to a PC or some other external device, I think a UART is highly overkill for a IC to IC communication path. #I2C VS UART PERFORMANCE HOW TO#It could get quite complicated because you pretty much have to define how to "communicate" over the physical link, what is an error, retries, etc. The SW implementation of how to message over that UART is quite a bit more complicated.you'll have to develop your own messenging protocol between the devices and decide what is a good message and what is a bad message.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |