s*****r
发帖数: 847 | | g******u
发帖数: 3060 | 2 TI has a document discussing communication bus pros and cons.
Try google. | s*****r
发帖数: 847 | 3 谢谢，听起来很不错
不过我google了一圈，也到TI的网站上找了一下
都没找到类似的文档呀？
有人能帮下忙吗？是不是我key word用的不对……
【在 g******u 的大作中提到】
: TI has a document discussing communication bus pros and cons.
: Try google.
| T******T
发帖数: 3066 | 4 UART : pro: established, simple, async
con: Dog slow
SPI: pro: established, easy protocol, could be high speed than UART or I2C
con: too many pin count
I2C: pro : 2 wires only, multi-slave/master,
con: loose standard, slow, HS speed requires active pullup driver,
more susceptible to glitches and false start/stop conditions
USB: pro: fast, low pin count,
con: more complicated PHY, controller design, more constraints on
la | g******u
发帖数: 3060 | 5 http://focus.ti.com.cn/cn/lit/an/slla067b/slla067b.pdf
googling is the most important technique for all engineers.
【在 s*****r 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢，听起来很不错
: 不过我google了一圈，也到TI的网站上找了一下
: 都没找到类似的文档呀？
: 有人能帮下忙吗？是不是我key word用的不对……
| s*****r
发帖数: 847 | 6 万分感谢
看来我google的水平还有待提高~~
【在 g******u 的大作中提到】
: http://focus.ti.com.cn/cn/lit/an/slla067b/slla067b.pdf
: googling is the most important technique for all engineers.
| s*****r
发帖数: 847 | 7 学习了，谢谢
conditions
on
【在 T******T 的大作中提到】
: UART : pro: established, simple, async
: con: Dog slow
: SPI: pro: established, easy protocol, could be high speed than UART or I2C
: con: too many pin count
: I2C: pro : 2 wires only, multi-slave/master,
: con: loose standard, slow, HS speed requires active pullup driver,
: more susceptible to glitches and false start/stop conditions
: USB: pro: fast, low pin count,
: con: more complicated PHY, controller design, more constraints on
:
| l***g
发帖数: 1035 | 8 add CAN in ur list.
spi and i2c are more for the inter-chip comm like adc, mem, etc. i
personally don't like i2c, driver is always a problem. spi read and write is
still complex. these two are bit based so you need to understand each clock
.
uart is byte based so it's much easier, variaties of rs232 485 can do long
distance. but no frame so comm protocol has to implement crc header etc on
the application level.
ethernet and can are frame based. much easier to implement. but can is
expensive on t |
|
