Hi,
On 18/08/12 11:52, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 09:42:32AM +0200, Roland Stigge wrote:
>> On transactions with n>=2 bytes, the controller actually wrongly
>> clocks in n+1 bytes. This is caused by the (wrong) assumption
>> that RFE in the Status Register is 1 iff there is no b
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 09:42:32AM +0200, Roland Stigge wrote:
> On transactions with n>=2 bytes, the controller actually wrongly clocks in n+1
> bytes. This is caused by the (wrong) assumption that RFE in the Status
> Register
> is 1 iff there is no byte already ordered (via a dummy TX byte). Thi
On transactions with n>=2 bytes, the controller actually wrongly clocks in n+1
bytes. This is caused by the (wrong) assumption that RFE in the Status Register
is 1 iff there is no byte already ordered (via a dummy TX byte). This lead to
the implementation of synchronized byte ordering, e.g.:
Dummy
3 matches
Mail list logo
