[Tinyos-devel] Proposed UART Changes

[Trevor Pace]

I like it. Very simple, gives quite a bit of control without having a lot of
different commands to implement.

Am I right in assuming that TOS_DUPLEX_OFF would be automatic
half-duplexing? or just both send/receive entirely shut-off and
TOS_DUPLEX_RONLY will enable reception/disable sending?

As long as we still are having run-time configurable baudrate then that
should be good.

Trevor Pace


On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Philip Levis <pal at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:

>
> On Jun 26, 2009, at 11:09 AM, Philip Levis wrote:
>
> >
> > 2 major changes: async operations and comments.
> >
> > Comments/feedback welcome.
> >
> > interface UartControl {
>
> In the recent core call, Vlado suggested that
>
> enableRx()
> disableRx()
> rxEnabled()
>
> enableTx()
> disableTx()
> txEnabled()
>
> be replaced by
>
> // TOS_DUPLEX_OFF, TOS_DUPLEX_RONLY, TOS_DUPLEX_TONLY, TOS_DUPLEX_FULL
> error_t setDuplexMode(tos_duplex_t d)
> tos_duplex_t getDuplexMode();
>
> Thoughts? With the enums, we can check at compile time whether a
> particular mode is supported.
>
> Phil
> _______________________________________________
> Tinyos-devel mailing list
> Tinyos-devel at millennium.berkeley.edu
> https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/pipermail/tinyos-devel/attachments/20090702/00cdd4f4/attachment.htm