Back
[00:00:14] <rue_house> but its just the test button
[00:00:20] <antto> but pressing the button doesn't corrupt the data, as far as i can tell from the LEDs
[00:00:26] <rue_house> ah
[00:00:48] <rue_house> so, something about your putchar is doing something to the wrong uart
[00:01:05] <rue_house> any chance its writing to both?
[00:01:13] <rue_house> 3 mins left
[00:01:17] <antto> loop_until_bit_is_set(UCSR1A, UDRE1);
[00:01:17] <antto> UDR1 = c;
[00:01:24] <antto> this is the whole putchar function ;]
[00:01:38] <rue_house> heh
[00:02:00] <rue_house> it hangs everything until the uart is ready?
[00:02:17] <rue_house> it donsn't cache the bytes?
[00:02:30] <antto> nnnnope, i think
[00:02:48] <antto> that there is a macro which does "do {} while(...)"
[00:02:58] <rue_house> is the rest interrupt driven or do other important things happen in the main loop?
[00:03:13] <rue_house> I can tell, thats fine
[00:03:13] <antto> the rest?
[00:03:26] <rue_house> dont you have count code going or soemting?
[00:03:43] <rue_house> it sounds like your multitasking needs work
[00:04:08] <antto> the firmware normally does a number of things
[00:04:28] <rue_house> and it has to stop doing them all whne you push that button
[00:04:39] <rue_house> so it can send your message
[00:04:52] <antto> i got a 1kHz timer, and a 4.8kHz timer, and a few interrupts (for midi, for the ftdi)
[00:05:04] <rue_house> hah
[00:05:23] <rue_house> are you doing a while() loop waiting for the uart IN an interrupt handler!
[00:05:37] <antto> ehm
[00:05:58] <antto> in the test routine, i put the midi bytes (from the interrupt) into a queue
[00:06:02] <rue_house> interrupt handler: get in, get the basics done fast, get out!
[00:06:16] <antto> then i poll them from the main thread, which checks teh buttons and so on
[00:06:53] <rue_house> so, if your main loop where just a while(1); your midi bytes should be fine?
[00:07:24] <antto> if i block interrupts for a long enough time - the slave misses a byte (or more) and then all following bytes are "off" (and they count as errors, but it has just went out of sync with the master)
[00:07:30] <rue_house> bah, I gotta go.... damn
[00:08:03] <antto> i'll now try something else
[00:08:11] <rue_house> good luck!
[00:08:28] <antto> instead of completely commenting out the uart_putchar(), i'll make it only send 0x00
[00:08:44] <antto> which should be silence, i guess
[00:08:50] <antto> no noise hopefully
[00:09:09] <N1njAway> antto: 0xFF would be silent, or more silent. You will still have the start bits.
[00:09:19] <antto> ah, good point
[00:09:22] <antto> so 0xFF then
[00:09:23] <N1njAway> This is why I suggested sending 0x00, 0xFF, and 0xAA patterns a number of hours ago :)
[00:09:33] <antto> yes, i know
[00:09:39] <antto> but i just haven't tested that yet
[00:09:48] <N1njAway> See what'cha get.
[00:09:56] <antto> i made a mess with these cables here ;P~
[00:10:05] <N1njAway> My HOPE is that 0xFF would produce less/fewer error bits.
[00:12:58] <antto> aha
[00:13:21] <antto> still 4 bytes in a row get corrupted (i tell by the LEDs)
[00:13:41] <antto> that's with 0xFF.. imma try 0x00 and others
[00:15:38] <antto> same with 0x00
[00:16:18] <N1njAway> I still think you're getting noise coupling. That or there's a bad ground somewhere.
[00:23:28] <rue_bed-aok> antto, can you set up some code to intermittently send a character and see if that too corrupts the data?
[00:28:46] <antto> rue_house you mean like.. send just 1 char over ftdi when i press the button?
[00:29:20] <rue_bed-aok> no
[00:29:44] <rue_bed-aok> have it send characters on a timed basis without pressing the button
[00:30:17] <rue_bed-aok> maybe on a loop counter rullover
[00:30:26] <rue_bed-aok> 16 bit
[00:30:43] <rue_bed-aok> if (count++ == 0) send(0x00)
[00:30:46] <rue_bed-aok> kinda thing
[00:41:39] <antto> nope
[00:41:53] <antto> that doesn't seem to corrupt the data
[00:42:30] <antto> i added it to the button as well.. i'm pressing it and i don't see errors (judging from the LEDs)
[00:43:10] <ecilop> PORTD &= ~_BV(PD1);
[00:43:31] <ecilop> equal to "PORTD &= ~(1 << PD1);"
[00:44:25] <N1njAway> antto: I have to take off for the night. Good luck with things! Hopefully you figure out what's going on.
[00:44:36] <rue_bed-aok> ecilop,
[00:44:41] <antto> thanks
[00:44:51] <antto> imma sleep
[00:44:55] <N1njAway> Report back if you would!
[00:45:01] <rue_bed-aok> #define SetBit(BIT, PORT) (PORT |= (1<<BIT))
[00:45:01] <rue_bed-aok> #define ClearBit(BIT, PORT) (PORT &= ~(1<<BIT))
[00:45:01] <rue_bed-aok> #define IsHigh(BIT, PORT) (PORT & (1<<BIT)) != 0
[00:45:01] <rue_bed-aok> #define IsLow(BIT, PORT) (PORT & (1<<BIT)) == 0
[00:45:01] <rue_bed-aok> #define NOP() asm volatile ("nop"::)
[00:45:01] <rue_bed-aok> #define ABS(a) ((a) < 0 ? -(a) : (a))
[00:45:03] <rue_bed-aok> #define SIGN(x) (x)==0?0:(x)>0?1:-1
[00:45:10] <antto> gonna leave this running >:)
[00:45:11] <rue_bed-aok> ecilop, ^^
[00:45:15] <N1njAway> Would love to hear what you figure it out be once you get it solved. You will! Just keep workign the problem :)
[00:45:43] <ecilop> rue_bed-aok: I use avr-libc without other defs
[00:45:45] <rue_bed-aok> ecilop, it seems you want to clear a bit, so use ClearBit(1, PORTD)
[00:46:08] <rue_bed-aok> ecilop, then why the mess of code?
[00:46:17] <rue_bed-aok> use someting readable, like ClearBit
[00:46:25] <antto> N1njAway but.. when i step back a little, i remember the root of the problem was slightly different, so it's even more weird
[00:47:08] <antto> cuz i had midi bytes on the input getting corrupted sometimes, not often, in normal operation (that is, not in this test routine)
[00:47:54] <antto> normal operation means, all kinds of other stuff happens, but the firmware wasn't sending anything to the ftdi at all
[00:48:09] <antto> but imma have to explain this some other time
[00:48:32] <antto> i certainly think that i'll be banging my head with this for quite a long time
[00:50:01] <antto> if it's noise on the pin at the cpu - that would still be a good explanation tho, yet still a bit weird that it happens rarely then
[00:50:28] <antto> okay.. ZzZz time
[00:52:07] <ecilop> rue_bed-aok: I use something standarted.. not 'readable' for you.
[00:52:52] <ecilop> rue_bed-aok: I am russian, and english is not 'readable' for me. Standard from datasheets - readable more
[00:53:53] <ecilop> antto: Is your FTDI original?
[00:59:09] <rue_bed-aok> use russian then
[00:59:24] <rue_bed-aok> but make a macro to put it into words,
[01:01:19] <ecilop> I use standard. Anyone with datasheet understand me without any additional defines
[01:02:19] <ecilop> unification - the best way
[01:13:43] <rue_bed-aok> tho most do not know how to read PORTD &= ~(1 << PD1); properly, or if it is even the same as PORTD &= ~_BV(PD1); so using a macro with the name of what you intend to happen is important
[01:14:25] <rue_bed-aok> or a function of whatever
[01:15:09] <rue_bed-aok> this morning it took 2 people over 5 minutes to work out a simple line of boolean logic code I posted
[01:16:08] <rue_bed-aok> personally, I dont care if comments or function names are not in english, thats what google translate is for
[01:18:25] <rue_bed-aok> it looks like it shoudl be the same
[01:19:10] <ecilop> Pure C don't like non ASCII defines..
[01:21:13] <rue_bed-aok> you would think by now unicode would work in more places
[01:21:41] <ecilop> Most people like goofy 'copy-paste'.. (about that 2 people over 5 minutes)
[01:21:50] <ecilop> *likes
[01:22:35] <ecilop> If I wrote
[01:22:38] <ecilop> asm volatile("cbi %[p],%[b]" :: [p] "I" (_SFR_IO_ADDR(PORTD)), [b] "I" (PD1));
[01:22:41] <ecilop> the copy-paste same wthout thinking
[01:22:48] <ecilop> *They
[01:22:50] <rue_bed-aok> interesting, the macros in avr-glibc cant be used for variables, and such, they are hard coded to FSR ports
[01:23:38] <rue_bed-aok> intersting you should bring that u
[01:23:40] <ecilop> #define may contain anything, it's only alias
[01:23:40] <rue_bed-aok> up
[01:24:18] <rue_bed-aok> I checked once to see what gcc was doing with my macros, and I was surprised that it actually did compile them down to the proper assembler instructions
[01:24:28] <rue_bed-aok> I was impressed
[01:25:27] <ecilop> compilation result depends of optimisation values
[01:25:37] <ecilop> sorry for my pure english language
[01:25:46] <rue_bed-aok> in my test it did it, I was impressed
[01:27:11] <ecilop> Depends of intricacy of your algorithm and optimisation level
[01:27:52] <rue_bed-aok> I'm happy, my boiler isn't exploding
[01:28:05] <rue_bed-aok> its holding steady at 75c
[01:28:11] <ecilop> Gcc works good
[01:28:47] <ecilop> IAR works better - people say
[01:29:33] <rue_bed-aok> I came from dos, where it told you properly where a code error was
[01:29:47] <rue_bed-aok> turboc++
[01:29:49] <ecilop> dos is OS, not compilator
[01:30:46] <ecilop> borland pascal :( , and fasm or masm - my experience
[01:31:20] <rue_bed-aok> pascall compiled quite well
[01:31:32] <rue_bed-aok> nice machine code out
[01:31:38] <ecilop> Result has huge runtime by default
[01:31:49] <ecilop> in pascal compile result
[01:31:49] <rue_bed-aok> oh? hmm
[01:31:52] <ecilop> really
[01:32:07] <rue_bed-aok> I didn't use it enough I guess
[01:32:13] <ecilop> many kbytes overhead
[01:32:36] <ecilop> near 24..40kB for runtime by default
[01:33:08] <rue_bed-aok> hmm, I remmeber dumping a few programs and they were quite clean
[01:33:14] <ecilop> It can be turned off with compile keys, but defaults...
[01:33:45] <rue_bed-aok> are you IN russia?
[01:33:49] <ecilop> Yes
[01:33:59] <rue_bed-aok> ah, hello russia :)
[01:34:07] <ecilop> here is winter
[01:34:09] <rue_bed-aok> I have a russian friend in vancouver
[01:34:26] <rue_bed-aok> I'm in canada, gmt-8
[01:34:43] <ecilop> I know geography (Soviet education was good)
[01:35:23] <ecilop> gmt+4 - here
[01:36:07] <rue_bed-aok> :( I cant remember any of the simple russian things my friend taught me
[01:36:18] <rue_bed-aok> host est...
[01:36:35] <rue_bed-aok> ...
[01:37:00] <rue_bed-aok> aok = asleep on keyboard
[01:37:11] <rue_bed-aok> <-- aok
[01:37:23] <ecilop> will know
[01:37:50] <specing> winter is coming, time to invade russia!
[01:38:17] <ecilop> invade?
[01:38:31] <rue_bed-aok> I dont think I ever see 'made in russia' on anything
[01:38:52] <ecilop> rue_bed-aok: AK-47 :)
[01:39:12] <rue_bed-aok> oh, I dont have any of those
[01:39:18] <specing> AK-47 are produced in many countries afaik
[01:40:05] <rue_bed-aok> usa wou;dn't let anyone invade russia , or everyone on the space station would have to die there
[01:40:35] <Thrashbarg> I've got an old Hi-Fi here 'Made in USSR'
[01:40:48] <rue_bed-aok> cool
[01:40:52] <specing> I think China is going to be the first to invade
[01:41:00] <Thrashbarg> germanium transistors. It has about 10W per channel
[01:41:09] <specing> just that they wont invade as much as just spill over their border
[01:41:14] <rue_bed-aok> oh, china dos't have to invade, they just take possesion
[01:41:31] <rue_bed-aok> as the usa's debts interest not exceeds their income
[01:42:19] <rue_bed-aok> if they want it, its going rotten from the middle out
[01:42:37] <ecilop> specing: no one of you wrote want to invade.. But NATO and UAS invades everywhere. All last wars is with american participation. Not chineese or rus...
[01:42:46] <ecilop> *NATO or USA
[01:43:54] <ecilop> Democracy with rockets...
[01:46:46] <ecilop> 'Taliban' is child of CIA. Did you know?
[01:48:07] <ecilop> All islamic 'terrorists' was sponcored from USA. Nurtured by american support.
[01:49:16] <specing> yep
[01:49:50] <ecilop> So who is main agressor in world? Rus, China? Or USA with NATO?
[01:50:33] <ecilop> Look to participants of last wars...
[01:50:38] <specing> GB
[01:55:42] <malinus> #avrPolitics
[01:56:01] <ecilop> malinus: I am not beginner..
[01:56:07] <ecilop> ;)
[01:56:18] <malinus> heh
[01:56:46] <malinus> ecilop: it's russia
[01:56:57] <ecilop> When I say that I am from Russia... It begins everywehere.
[01:56:59] <specing> [sanctioning intensifies]
[01:57:04] <Thrashbarg> heh
[01:57:27] <specing> ecilop: next time say you are from north korea :)
[01:58:14] <specing> err
[01:58:17] <specing> best korea!
[01:58:32] <malinus> ecilop: well you just annexed a country, what do you expect :D
[01:59:29] <ecilop> malinus: Who said that for you? Your media, and politics..
[01:59:45] <malinus> yeah, I should listen more to the liberal media of russia :D
[02:00:14] <malinus> I might litreally as well just make up things myself
[02:00:34] <ecilop> Do you know that in Crimea were plebiscit like in Scotland?
[02:01:00] <malinus> let's not get into this in here, sorry for starting this
[02:01:09] <ecilop> Crimean people chose seperation
[02:01:39] <ecilop> Scotland people chose union.. thats all
[02:02:03] <ecilop> But your politicas don't like crimean people chose
[02:02:30] <ecilop> And tell you that was annexion
[02:02:34] <malinus> ecilop: only difference is that england didn't support terrorists in scotland, nor sent their troops to scotland later.
[02:03:46] <specing> tbh russia didn't do that either
[02:03:55] <ecilop> malinus: what terracts int Crimea???
[02:03:59] <specing> their troops were already there ;)
[02:04:17] <malinus> specing: according to whom? Putin?
[02:04:22] <malinus> okay let's stop this
[02:04:26] <malinus> this is not the place for this
[02:05:08] <ecilop> Rus troops was there by contract with Ukrain about russian Black Sea Fleet
[02:05:24] <ecilop> Like american fleet in Japan
[02:05:42] <ecilop> So americans annexed Japan?
[02:06:12] <specing> malinus: Crimea housed around 20000 soldiers before this thing began
[02:06:46] <ecilop> specing: seems you more awared than malinus
[02:08:21] <ecilop> malinus: can you submit that it was people choice to separate from nazi Kiev?
[02:09:44] <malinus> no, but let's not continue this any further. I don't want to be banned from here by spamming it with inane discussion.
[02:09:54] <malinus> it - this channel
[02:14:59] <specing> we can neither confirm or deny that -- insuficient data
[06:12:02] <LeoNerd> Offhand does anyone know the difference between an ATtiny84 and 84A?
[06:12:14] <LeoNerd> I'm presuming the A is newer/better somehow
[06:13:56] <Lambda_Aurigae> http://sellout.woot.com/offers/centon-class-10-microsd-cards-3-sizes-4?utm_source=Daily+Digest&utm_campaign=982829314b-Daily+Digest+-+20141023+-+Sellout.Woot&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c5ca76da11-982829314b-283918266#tracked
[06:14:06] <Lambda_Aurigae> not the answer but fun stuff anyhow.
[06:14:45] <LeoNerd> I know the P variants are picoPower
[06:15:35] <Lambda_Aurigae> A also appears to be a picoPower variant
[06:16:16] <LeoNerd> Hmm
[06:16:23] <LeoNerd> Ahwell. What happened is I wanted an 84, and they sent me an 84A. So likely it matters not
[06:16:26] <Lambda_Aurigae> just from looking at the datasheet.
[06:16:42] <Lambda_Aurigae> the A will run down to 1.8V
[06:17:00] <LeoNerd> Ah
[06:17:29] <LeoNerd> OK, good to know though given my radio needs 3.3 I doubt I can make use of that
[06:17:34] <Lambda_Aurigae> if you look at the first page of both datasheets you can usually figure out the differences easily.
[06:17:59] <Lambda_Aurigae> hmm...regular will run down to 1.8V too.
[06:18:27] <Lambda_Aurigae> oh,,no.
[06:18:32] <Lambda_Aurigae> V will run down to 1.8V
[06:18:39] <Lambda_Aurigae> regular down to 2.7V
[06:18:58] <Lambda_Aurigae> look at speed grade section and operating voltage section on the first page of both chips.
[06:19:43] <Lambda_Aurigae> A version draws less current.
[06:22:34] <Lambda_Aurigae> functionally, from 2.7V up they should be pretty much the same other than slightly lower current draw on the A version.
[06:23:03] <LeoNerd> Ah OK.. so one of those "minor internal improvement" things
[06:23:25] <Lambda_Aurigae> well, being able to run down to 1.8V is not exactly minor for some people....
[06:23:37] <Lambda_Aurigae> guessing it's a new chip die technology.
[07:39:30] <LeoNerd> Lambda_Aurigae: AVR526 is titled "Migrating from ATtiny24/44/84 to ATtiny24A/44A/84A" and seems to explain it nicely
[07:40:45] <LeoNerd> Basically: lower idle current..
[08:01:51] <LeoNerd> Sooo.. Thoughts on FTDI today? are people considering jumping ship to the PL2303 instead?
[08:02:07] <LeoNerd> I admit I'm looking into the differences
[08:06:27] <MarkX> morning everyone
[08:13:09] <LeoNerd> Hrm.. Seems like it's basically impossible to find PL2303-based boards/cables/etc.. with anything more than just RX/TX, even though that chip still has all the handshaking lines
[08:35:32] <MarkX> so it turns out, altium pretty much errors out if you have a mislabelled pin in a footprint
[08:43:39] <felsom> @awozniak
[08:48:32] <Phantom> LeoNerd: pl2303 is very crappy... the only plus is that it's cheaper than the ftdi
[08:50:02] <LeoNerd> Yah, but does its crappiness actually matter?
[08:50:11] <LeoNerd> E.g. it doesn't have the fancy LEDs or GPIO pins, but *shrug*
[08:51:11] <Valen> does it use the ftdi driver?
[08:51:50] <Phantom> it use their shitty driver that sometime BSOD windows and kernel panic linux
[08:52:20] <LeoNerd> I thought it was a standard CDC
[08:52:37] <twnqx> hey rue_house, did you see my pastebin of yesterday? :)
[08:52:57] <twnqx> fuck, 9:30pm and i am drinking coffee
[09:06:19] <quantum-mechanic> how about VUSB ?
[09:08:10] <MarkX> iirc VUSB is flaky and has speed issues
[09:08:41] <MarkX> yay i finally get to learn VIA's and proper routing :3
[09:10:54] <twnqx> "learn"
[09:11:00] <twnqx> what's there to learn :S
[09:12:11] <MarkX> well i've never even placed a VIA
[09:12:22] <MarkX> so i get to learn how to do that, where to use it properly
[09:12:23] <MarkX> etc
[09:15:24] <Shavik|Work2> I never went to school for this, all self taught. The Master degree in electrical engineering can barely do PCBs. it feels so backwards. But then again, there are so many ocassions where I'm asking him to explain a very basic concept lol
[09:15:28] <Shavik|Work2> relating to learning vias
[09:21:43] <twnqx> there's a free book i pretty much liked
[09:21:46] <twnqx> "right the first time"
[09:21:49] <twnqx> on pcb design
[09:22:24] <MarkX> Shavik|Work2: heh i hear ya. i went for robotics engineering. all of this is self taught
[09:22:51] <Shavik|Work2> I'm originally computer science and have done SW development for around 5-10 years before I started with arduinos back in 2008
[09:22:59] <Shavik|Work2> now I'm designing PCB's for hospital equipment
[09:22:59] <Shavik|Work2> wooo
[09:23:05] <MarkX> twnqx:
http://www.thehighspeeddesignbook.com/ << that one?
[09:23:17] <MarkX> Shavik|Work2: nice~
[09:23:19] <MarkX> !
[09:23:30] <twnqx> MarkX: yes, that one
[09:23:36] <twnqx> comes in handy when frequencies rise
[09:23:43] <twnqx> e.g. usb3/pcie
[09:24:38] <twnqx> the normal stuff... well
[09:25:00] <twnqx> i read recently hat all the rules like e.g. "45° bends only!" are effectively pointless
[09:25:04] <twnqx> and 90° are as good
[09:25:10] <twnqx> just not as visually pleasing :P
[09:25:36] <MarkX> hmm the one course i took on this kinda stuff was back in highschool and the teacher said, no 90!
[09:25:37] <MarkX> XD
[09:25:46] <MarkX> err sorry, no 45, only 90
[09:25:50] <twnqx> lol
[09:25:51] <twnqx> what
[09:26:00] <MarkX> yep
[09:26:06] <MarkX> everything had to be 90degrees
[09:26:20] <MarkX> my first design was all curvy like giant S shapes
[09:26:29] <MarkX> she said start over :(
[09:28:41] <LeoNerd> The only hard-and-fast rules are the rules that come from your fab house
[09:28:46] <LeoNerd> All else is suggestions and good-practice
[09:29:02] <LeoNerd> "Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools"
[09:29:46] <MarkX> heh i like that
[09:30:55] <twnqx> ok
[09:31:01] <twnqx> so i can't find the article
[09:31:30] <twnqx> but quick googling says that the only problem with 90° bends is production, as the bends cause acid traps
[09:33:01] <LeoNerd> Yah; ask your boardhouse about it
[09:33:04] <twnqx> LeoNerd: well, in *some* cases rules are hard
[09:33:13] <LeoNerd> Very few.
[09:33:24] <LeoNerd> v <= 2.99E8 m/sec is a hard rule
[09:33:24] <twnqx> but mostly that comes into play in ghz+ impedance controlled transmission lines
[09:33:37] <LeoNerd> Most other things are negotiable :)
[09:34:28] <twnqx> or super high frequency analog designs
[09:34:55] <MarkX> the designs that others make are so cool
[09:35:08] <MarkX> but i think they use more than 2 layers
[09:35:35] <twnqx> why not :P
[09:35:53] <twnqx> 4 layers is not so much more expensive :P
[09:36:18] <LeoNerd> I like 2 layer if possible as it means physical visual inspection is actually possible
[09:37:25] <twnqx> you mostly have to solid planes (power + gnd) with holes where vias are inside :P
[09:37:30] <twnqx> two*
[09:38:20] <MarkX> :|
[09:38:27] <MarkX> good lord! that would help so much
[09:38:35] <MarkX> genius!
[09:39:06] <twnqx> that's the normal application of 4+ layers...
[09:39:29] <MarkX> so 2 solid planes, then 2 for routing?
[09:39:33] <twnqx> yes
[09:39:45] <twnqx> you can do routing on the inner layers if absolutely needed
[09:39:55] <twnqx> but the solid ones are inner ones, normally
[09:40:02] <MarkX> holy crap. where can i read up on this
[09:42:42] <twnqx> google pcb layer stackup
[09:43:30] <MarkX> k
[09:44:14] <twnqx> http://www.bitweenie.com/listings/standard-4-and-6-layer-pcb-stackups/
[09:44:16] <twnqx> e.g.
[09:44:52] <MarkX> found this too >>
http://www.icd.com.au/articles/Stackup_Planning_AN2011_2.pdf
[09:50:07] <twnqx> goes a bit further :P
[09:50:09] <twnqx> 16 layers, heh
[09:51:40] <MarkX> heh the video i'm watching talks about 8
[09:51:46] <MarkX> with micro vias
[09:51:47] <MarkX> :P
[09:52:11] <twnqx> micro vias
[09:52:29] <twnqx> heh
[09:52:48] <twnqx> get plated blind microvias in pads for more fun!
[09:53:12] <twnqx> and then put your BGAs straight on top!
[09:53:37] <MarkX> gibberish
[09:53:38] <MarkX> XD
[09:53:56] <twnqx> exactly
[10:49:48] <Shavik|Work2> http://i.imgur.com/mJLNCOc.jpg That doesn't look good for 485 does it?
[10:56:51] <aandrew> Shavik|Work2: youv'e got a fair bit of ripple on those lines
[10:57:08] <Shavik|Work2> They are both high
[10:57:14] <aandrew> 55kHz? switcher?
[10:57:30] <Shavik|Work2> So I have two devices. one is an embedded linux controller
[10:57:42] <aandrew> if they're both high you've got trouble.
[10:57:56] <aandrew> RS485 shouldn't be that way. post your schematic
[10:58:01] <Shavik|Work2> The other custom made PCB. the custom made PCB has a switcher but virtually undetectable ripple with this 50mhz scope
[10:58:09] <Shavik|Work2> I am missing the termination resistor
[10:58:17] <Shavik|Work2> but the cable is only like 5-6 ft
[10:58:28] <aandrew> ou should also break the bus (disconnect the devices from eahc other) and see what the lines look like on both sides
[10:58:32] <aandrew> put the terminator in
[10:58:57] <Shavik|Work2> https://www.dropbox.com/s/5g3popp3p5e29nh/Screenshot%202014-10-23%2010.39.27.png?dl=0
[10:59:05] <Shavik|Work2> note: the resistor is not on the actual board
[10:59:09] <Shavik|Work2> its been an after the fact correction
[10:59:13] <aandrew> you've got about 1V of ripple on 6V; that's pretty significant
[11:03:33] <Shavik|Work2> Here is the thing. I have the exact same waveform. if i disconnect my custom device
[11:03:53] <Shavik|Work2> Using an Embedded ARM device.
http://wiki.embeddedarm.com/wiki/TS-8200-4200#DB9
[11:04:07] <Shavik|Work2> http://wiki.embeddedarm.com/wiki/TS-4200#UARTs
[11:09:30] <Shavik|Work2> Narrowing it down. This is the 485 lines when only my custom pcb is connected. no ripple but odd voltages
[11:09:31] <Shavik|Work2> http://i.imgur.com/pxUiFGL.jpg
[11:35:56] <Shavik|Work2> http://i.imgur.com/WfQeNad.jpg
[11:35:57] <Shavik|Work2> closer
[11:36:10] <Shavik|Work2> I think I was setting TX EN high when transmitting when it needed to be low :P
[11:38:00] <LeoNerd> Ah, EN vs. !EN
[11:53:28] <hetii> Hi :)
[14:45:49] <MarkX> aww yisss
[14:45:54] <MarkX> found a secret bathroom at work
[14:46:02] <MarkX> not really secret but out of the way so no one uses it
[14:53:23] <LeoNerd> Hehe
[14:54:46] <cmtptr> pull a george costanza
[14:54:50] <cmtptr> put a padlock on it
[15:01:33] <x29a> MarkX: the last one there, is that you?
https://narf-archive.com/pix/4e903f48a2d8e4d8f3261b93682dc35e5ae46669.jpeg
[15:02:28] <MarkX> x29a: lmao worse. i can't even pee in a public bathroom
[15:02:31] <MarkX> never used a urinal before
[15:02:40] <MarkX> and never pooped in a public bathroom before
[15:06:17] * MarkX is strange
[15:06:19] <specing> dat moment when you are in the middle of lab excersizes, next in the row to be called up and you really need to go poop
[15:16:49] <x29a> MarkX:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paruresis#Treatment
[15:17:40] <MarkX> lmao that doesn't happen to me
[15:17:44] <MarkX> i don't clam up
[15:17:59] <MarkX> i just prefer not to use the bathrooms if i don;t have to
[17:05:42] <vsync1> much disappoint in the sd->usd adapter dx sells
[17:05:48] <vsync1> the contacts are too short
[23:38:53] <N1njAway> Hey Antto, any luck with your project?
