Page 14 of 19
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 09 Mar 2020 22:10
by terriblefire
My central heating has packed in so didnt get near the lab tonight.
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 09 Mar 2020 22:49
by go0se
terriblefire wrote: 09 Mar 2020 22:10
My central heating has packed in so didnt get near the lab tonight.
From the dry heat of the desert, back to Scotland with no central heating - Ouch! :o
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 09 Mar 2020 23:52
by arkadiusz.makarenko
I managed to bugfix mouse initialisation. It was very silly bug, but I am beginner in C after all.
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 10 Mar 2020 09:31
by terriblefire
go0se wrote: 09 Mar 2020 22:49
From the dry heat of the desert, back to Scotland with no central heating - Ouch! :o
Aye. Shockaroony.
arkadiusz.makarenko wrote: 09 Mar 2020 23:52
I managed to bugfix mouse initialisation. It was very silly bug, but I am beginner in C after all.
Hardfault usually equals stack overflow in my experience with that chip.
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 10 Mar 2020 22:15
by arkadiusz.makarenko
There is another bug. Mouse X,y in mouse variable are stored as uint8_t but should be int16_t. Direction of move is lost on cast.
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 11 Mar 2020 19:32
by terriblefire
I've tried firing it up and with one device i always get hardfaults and the other i get...
hardfault.JPG
Basically looks like the 105 doesnt have the RAM for what we're trying to do
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 11 Mar 2020 20:42
by arkadiusz.makarenko
terriblefire wrote: 11 Mar 2020 19:32
I've tried firing it up and with one device i always get hardfaults and the other i get...
hardfault.JPG
Basically looks like the 105 doesnt have the RAM for what we're trying to do
There is interface switching after receiving data from device or SOF, Device type changes and as it is non blocking code once it runs as deviceType mouse and on the other as deviceType keyboard on each cyckle. It may screw up keyboard settings or even kb_clock ? (maybe).
Device bufferes are 500bytes each, there should be enough ram to handle it. IDE say that about 3-4k is used.
May I ask what device throws hardfaults?
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 11 Mar 2020 21:03
by terriblefire
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 11 Mar 2020 21:18
by arkadiusz.makarenko
Damn. I have lower model MK220 (works ok). I will try to get one set soon.
Meanwhile, could you read hid descriptors from them (usbhid-dump on linux) I would compare it with my one, and see where issue may be.
Re: TF Riser Revision 0 Arrives
Posted: 11 Mar 2020 22:04
by arkadiusz.makarenko
terriblefire wrote: 11 Mar 2020 19:32
I've tried firing it up and with one device i always get hardfaults and the other i get...
hardfault.JPG
Basically looks like the 105 doesnt have the RAM for what we're trying to do
This can only happen on usb disconnects. There must be a bug which screws something up.(I suspect mouse init - buffer length allocation). I will try to investigate this.
I have built hid2ami and written my own firmware on f105, and devices which I have at home do behave, so only way forward is to find more devices and trace this issue.