CCS C Software and Maintenance Offers
FAQFAQ   FAQForum Help   FAQOfficial CCS Support   SearchSearch  RegisterRegister 

ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

CCS does not monitor this forum on a regular basis.

Please do not post bug reports on this forum. Send them to CCS Technical Support

Code explanation

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
docp



Joined: 17 Nov 2011
Posts: 3

View user's profile Send private message

Code explanation
PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 7:09 am     Reply with quote

I have been out of coding for some time and wanted to find out if someone can fully explain the code below.
Code:

#INT_TIMER1
void TIMER1_isr(void)
{
++overflow_count;
}

#INT_CCP1
void CCP1_isr(void)
{
end_time = (int32)CCP_1;
period = ((int32)0x1000 * (int32)overflow_count) - (int32)start_time + (int32)end_time;
freq = (int32)1/period;
start_time = end_time;
overflow_count = 0;
}
Ttelmah



Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 19538

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Thu Nov 17, 2011 9:16 am     Reply with quote

It is just extending the size of the counter.

The CCP, records in hardware an INT16 count of when events happen based on a timer. Here the CCP is being used to measure an interval between 'start_time', and 'end_time'. However what happens if this interval is longer than int16 counts?.
So the answer is to extend the counter. A separate int16 counter 'overflow_count', is being maintained, which increments whenever the timer overflows. Then the 32 bit counter, is 16bits of 'overflow_count', catenated to 16bits from the CCP. The maths moves this 16bit word up to the top 16bits in a 32bit value, adds it to 'end_time', and subtracts the 'start_time' (remember reversing the order of an addition does not matter).

Best Wishes
docp



Joined: 17 Nov 2011
Posts: 3

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 12:03 am     Reply with quote

Many thanks.

I am trying to find out this part particularly,
Code:

period = ((int32)0x1000 * (int32)overflow_count) - (int32)start_time + (int32)end_time;
RF_Developer



Joined: 07 Feb 2011
Posts: 839

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:19 am     Reply with quote

docp wrote:

I am trying to find out this part particularly,
Code:

period = ((int32)0x1000 * (int32)overflow_count) - (int32)start_time + (int32)end_time;


Ttelmah said it:
Quote:

The maths moves this 16bit word up to the top 16bits in a 32bit value, adds it to 'end_time', and subtracts the 'start_time' (remember reversing the order of an addition does not matter).


That code could also have been written:
Code:

period = ((int32)overflow_count << 16) + end_time - start_time;


Its the same thing as the original code, without the paranoid casts (which confuse the code) and doing the sums in a different order, as the original was perhaps somewhat peculiar doing it another way round for no gain, and simply adding to a code reader's confusion. All its doing is using timer 1 and CCP1 as a long counter: timer 1 is counts the overflows of CCP1.

What's causing the confusion? The C, the maths, or the use of hardware?

RF Developer
docp



Joined: 17 Nov 2011
Posts: 3

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 2:35 am     Reply with quote

Quote:


What's causing the confusion? The C, the maths, or the use of hardware?

RF Developer


I just wanted some more clarification of that line of code, I see that you explained there is a shift of the overflow_count
RF_Developer



Joined: 07 Feb 2011
Posts: 839

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:23 am     Reply with quote

Note that code should be:
Code:

period = ((int32)overflow_count << 12) + end_time - start_time;


The original code, as presented to us, multiplied by 0x1000, which is a *12* bit shift, not a 16 bit shift which would be * 0x10000.

The CCS compiler is probably clever enough to know to implement 0x1000 * overflow_count as a shift. If not then the code will be very inefficient as we ll as unclear as it will implement a full on 32 bit multiply instead of a shft.

I'm not sure if the original code is correct, i.e. whether it should have been 0x10000 or 0x1000 as written. I've not used the CCPs much.Embarassed

RF Developer
Ttelmah



Joined: 11 Mar 2010
Posts: 19538

View user's profile Send private message

PostPosted: Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:33 am     Reply with quote

Yes, to both parts from RF_Developer:
1) The compiler is smart enough to implement any constant binary multiplication, as a shift.
2) The original code is wrong. The CCP records a 16bit timer value. I'd suspect a 0 has been lost....

Best Wishes
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    CCS Forum Index -> General CCS C Discussion All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group