From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-06-21 18:28:16
|
Bugs item #1510144, was opened at 2006-06-21 19:28 Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by Item Submitter You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in header at89c51ed2.h Initial Comment: in at89c51ed2.h name of register is wrong line 134 __sfr __at (0xB7) IP0H; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH should read __sfr __at (0xB7) IPH0; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH ref. Atmel datasheet for AT89C51RD2/ED2 Rev. 4235Câ8051â08/03 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-06-22 03:12:02
|
Bugs item #1510144, was opened at 2006-06-21 11:28 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by jesusc You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in header at89c51ed2.h Initial Comment: in at89c51ed2.h name of register is wrong line 134 __sfr __at (0xB7) IP0H; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH should read __sfr __at (0xB7) IPH0; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH ref. Atmel datasheet for AT89C51RD2/ED2 Rev. 4235Câ8051â08/03 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Jesus Calvino-Fraga (jesusc) Date: 2006-06-21 20:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=603650 Thanks for the report! Fixed in revision 4244. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-06-22 08:09:50
|
Bugs item #1510144, was opened at 2006-06-21 20:28 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by frief You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Pending Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in header at89c51ed2.h Initial Comment: in at89c51ed2.h name of register is wrong line 134 __sfr __at (0xB7) IP0H; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH should read __sfr __at (0xB7) IPH0; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH ref. Atmel datasheet for AT89C51RD2/ED2 Rev. 4235Câ8051â08/03 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2006-06-22 10:09 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Hi, this could also be a typo in the Atmel datasheet? - other registers within at89c51ed2.h (CCAP0H, CCAP0L, ...) and the bit definitions for IP0H registers use the postfix notation (f.e. #define PX0H 0x01) - the name IP0H is also used in P89LPC901.h, 89LPC922.h, P89LPC932.h and p89v51rd2.h - using L or H as postfix instead of inserting them can be considered good practice because in an alphabetical index the related registers (or register bit definitions) show up next. So I'd vote for changing back. As I'm unsure how to proceed I set this report to pending again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jesus Calvino-Fraga (jesusc) Date: 2006-06-22 05:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=603650 Thanks for the report! Fixed in revision 4244. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-06-22 09:00:31
|
Bugs item #1510144, was opened at 2006-06-21 20:28 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by maartenbrock You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Pending Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in header at89c51ed2.h Initial Comment: in at89c51ed2.h name of register is wrong line 134 __sfr __at (0xB7) IP0H; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH should read __sfr __at (0xB7) IPH0; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH ref. Atmel datasheet for AT89C51RD2/ED2 Rev. 4235Câ8051â08/03 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Maarten Brock (maartenbrock) Date: 2006-06-22 11:00 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=888171 Atmel is pretty consistent in this one. They use IPH0, IPL0, IPH1 and IPL1 throughout the datasheet. Also in the header files they provide themselves it's called IPH0. So no typo here in my opinion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2006-06-22 10:09 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Hi, this could also be a typo in the Atmel datasheet? - other registers within at89c51ed2.h (CCAP0H, CCAP0L, ...) and the bit definitions for IP0H registers use the postfix notation (f.e. #define PX0H 0x01) - the name IP0H is also used in P89LPC901.h, 89LPC922.h, P89LPC932.h and p89v51rd2.h - using L or H as postfix instead of inserting them can be considered good practice because in an alphabetical index the related registers (or register bit definitions) show up next. So I'd vote for changing back. As I'm unsure how to proceed I set this report to pending again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jesus Calvino-Fraga (jesusc) Date: 2006-06-22 05:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=603650 Thanks for the report! Fixed in revision 4244. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-07-09 23:07:41
|
Bugs item #1510144, was opened at 2006-06-21 19:28 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sjborley You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in header at89c51ed2.h Initial Comment: in at89c51ed2.h name of register is wrong line 134 __sfr __at (0xB7) IP0H; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH should read __sfr __at (0xB7) IPH0; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH ref. Atmel datasheet for AT89C51RD2/ED2 Rev. 4235Câ8051â08/03 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Date: 2006-07-10 00:07 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1270801 I agree with Maarten on this. We should follow Atmel's datasheet. I stand by my original report. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maarten Brock (maartenbrock) Date: 2006-06-22 10:00 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=888171 Atmel is pretty consistent in this one. They use IPH0, IPL0, IPH1 and IPL1 throughout the datasheet. Also in the header files they provide themselves it's called IPH0. So no typo here in my opinion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2006-06-22 09:09 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Hi, this could also be a typo in the Atmel datasheet? - other registers within at89c51ed2.h (CCAP0H, CCAP0L, ...) and the bit definitions for IP0H registers use the postfix notation (f.e. #define PX0H 0x01) - the name IP0H is also used in P89LPC901.h, 89LPC922.h, P89LPC932.h and p89v51rd2.h - using L or H as postfix instead of inserting them can be considered good practice because in an alphabetical index the related registers (or register bit definitions) show up next. So I'd vote for changing back. As I'm unsure how to proceed I set this report to pending again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jesus Calvino-Fraga (jesusc) Date: 2006-06-22 04:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=603650 Thanks for the report! Fixed in revision 4244. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2006-07-10 06:50:54
|
Bugs item #1510144, was opened at 2006-06-21 20:28 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by frief You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None >Status: Closed >Resolution: Fixed Priority: 5 Submitted By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: Error in header at89c51ed2.h Initial Comment: in at89c51ed2.h name of register is wrong line 134 __sfr __at (0xB7) IP0H; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH should read __sfr __at (0xB7) IPH0; //Interrupt Priority 0 HIGH ref. Atmel datasheet for AT89C51RD2/ED2 Rev. 4235Câ8051â08/03 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2006-07-10 08:50 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Ok, fine. Will stay as requested in your report and as fixed in revision 4244. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Steven Borley (sjborley) Date: 2006-07-10 01:07 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1270801 I agree with Maarten on this. We should follow Atmel's datasheet. I stand by my original report. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Maarten Brock (maartenbrock) Date: 2006-06-22 11:00 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=888171 Atmel is pretty consistent in this one. They use IPH0, IPL0, IPH1 and IPL1 throughout the datasheet. Also in the header files they provide themselves it's called IPH0. So no typo here in my opinion. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Frieder Ferlemann (frief) Date: 2006-06-22 10:09 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=589052 Hi, this could also be a typo in the Atmel datasheet? - other registers within at89c51ed2.h (CCAP0H, CCAP0L, ...) and the bit definitions for IP0H registers use the postfix notation (f.e. #define PX0H 0x01) - the name IP0H is also used in P89LPC901.h, 89LPC922.h, P89LPC932.h and p89v51rd2.h - using L or H as postfix instead of inserting them can be considered good practice because in an alphabetical index the related registers (or register bit definitions) show up next. So I'd vote for changing back. As I'm unsure how to proceed I set this report to pending again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jesus Calvino-Fraga (jesusc) Date: 2006-06-22 05:12 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=603650 Thanks for the report! Fixed in revision 4244. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=100599&aid=1510144&group_id=599 |