Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Can you please provide more information on the bug, such as:
o What FTDI device are you using with libmpsse?
o What I2C device are you communicating with?
o How do you have your I2C device connected to the FTDI chip?
o Have you tested and verified that the start condition did not work prior to your patch and that it does work after applying your patch?
Considering that the I2C clock and data lines are part of the low 8 bits on the
FTDI chip's MPSSE bus (reference: FTDI Application Note 135), I don't see how
applying changes to the high 8 bits would provide proper control over the I2C
pins. Additionally, I have used libmpsse in its current configuration to
communicate with I2C devices before, so I can verify that the current
implementation of the Start() method is functioning properly for me.
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 19 Sep 2012 at 1:38
FTDI chip: FT2232H
Target I2C device: micro controller (it supports EEPROM like accessing)
Connection: FTDI device channel A and MCU are connected directly.
MCU SCL - FTDI TCK/SK(16)
MCU SDA - FTDI TDI/DO(17) & TDO/DI(18)
(SCL and SDA lines are pulled-up to 3.3V)
I have to say sorry that the patch was incorrect.
It breaks a repeated start condition.
Attached files are test code and captured waveform.
Original comment by 6sa2n4r...@gmail.com
on 20 Sep 2012 at 1:29
Attachments:
Ah, a picture is worth a thousand words; sorry, I thought you were having
problems with speaking I2C to a particular device.
This is a known issue, although it *shouldn't* cause problems with I2C
compliant devices.
The extra low clock output that you're seeing is performed in order to
absolutely ensure that the SDA and SCL lines are in their expected states prior
to issuing a repeated start condition (the Start() function is used for both
starts and repeated starts). If a start condition has not been previously
issued, the clock toggle will be ignored by I2C devices on the bus anyway, and
if it has then this will be seen as a repeated start condition. However, it
does look odd on the 'scope and is an undesirable side-effect.
After some thought, I think there is a simple fix for this that doesn't break
repeated start conditions, but I'll have to wait until I get home tonight to
test it and check it in.
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 20 Sep 2012 at 2:55
Just checked in a patch that removes the extra clock toggle on a start
condition, but preserves the expected behavior for a repeated start condition.
Original comment by heffne...@gmail.com
on 21 Sep 2012 at 3:04
Thank you for your quick work.
Latest code on repository works perfectly!
Original comment by 6sa2n4r...@gmail.com
on 21 Sep 2012 at 4:17
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
6sa2n4r...@gmail.com
on 19 Sep 2012 at 9:58Attachments: