完善资料让更多小伙伴认识你，还能领取20积分哦， 立即完善>
3天内不再提示
2411
|
PLIB PosisSpIn写与PiBixPosisSpPoSET的区别是什么？
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 what is the difference between PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite vs PLIB_PORTS_PinSet? 
0
|
|
相关推荐
8个回答
|
|
|
记录在案？http://MyCHIPCDeave/COMQue:PLIB端口
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 as documented ? http://microchipdeveloper.com/harmony:plib-ports |
|
|
|
|
|
那有什么微妙的差别呢？PiBixPosissPoWrand（PoxsIdIy0，PothChhannEngC，PoxsS.BiPosiPosi4，1）将一个“1”写到RC4PLIB PosisSpISET（PoxsSIDID0，PothChhannLya，PoxsS.BiToPase2）设置RA2 PIN高（我假设与端口VS LAT有关的东西，但我不确定……）
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 funny what's the subtle difference in there, then? PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite (PORTS_ID_0, PORT_CHANNEL_C, PORTS_BIT_POS_4, 1) Writes a "1" to RC4 PLIB_PORTS_PinSet (PORTS_ID_0, PORT_CHANNEL_A, PORTS_BIT_POS_2) Sets RA2 pin high (I assume something related to PORT vs LAT, but am not sure...) |
|
|
|
|
|
聪明，没有什么关于LAT写，所以它可以。从语法，它看起来像使用PICSET，我们不必指定1在辩论结束。两个都做同样的事情，然而，为什么微芯片创建两个功能？它可能是LAT相关的吗？
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 clever, there is nothing about LAT write so it could be. from the syntax, it looks like using Pinset we don't have to specify 1 at the end of arguments. both are doing the same thing, however, so why microchip create two functions? could it be LAT related? |
|
|
|
|
|
实现揭示了令人震惊的差异：PunSe:PixLe: Prime:PbIbPosisSpSSET（）可以设置一个PIN，而PLIPHPurthsPin（）可以清除一个PIN，而PLIPBIX PosisPoWrice（）可以同时做到这两个！太棒了！-）http://MyCHIPCDeave/COMPION: PLIB API PosiSIS是一个更好的链接。
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 Implementation reveals the shocking difference: PinSet: PLIB_INLINE_API void PLIB_PORTS_PinSet(PORTS_MODULE_ID index, PORTS_CHANNEL channel, PORTS_BIT_POS bitPos) { PORTS_PinSet_MCU32_PPS(index, channel, bitPos); }PLIB_TEMPLATE void PORTS_PinSet_MCU32_PPS( PORTS_MODULE_ID index , PORTS_CHANNEL channel , PORTS_BIT_POS bitPos ) { *(&LATBSET + (channel - 1) * 0x40) = 1< } PinClear: PLIB_INLINE_API void PLIB_PORTS_PinClear(PORTS_MODULE_ID index, PORTS_CHANNEL channel, PORTS_BIT_POS bitPos) { PORTS_PinClear_MCU32_PPS(index, channel, bitPos); } PLIB_TEMPLATE void PORTS_PinClear_MCU32_PPS( PORTS_MODULE_ID index , PORTS_CHANNEL channel , PORTS_BIT_POS bitPos ) { *(&LATBCLR + (channel - 1) * 0x40) = 1< } PinWrite: PLIB_INLINE_API void PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite(PORTS_MODULE_ID index, PORTS_CHANNEL channel, PORTS_BIT_POS bitPos, bool value) { PORTS_PinWrite_MCU32_PPS(index, channel, bitPos, value); }PLIB_TEMPLATE void PORTS_PinWrite_MCU32_PPS( PORTS_MODULE_ID index , PORTS_CHANNEL channel , PORTS_BIT_POS bitPos , bool value ) { /* Atomic Implementation */ if(value == true) { *(&LATBSET + (channel - 1) * 0x40) = 1< else { *(&LATBCLR + (channel - 1) * 0x40) = 1< } PLIB_PORTS_PinSet() can set a pin, and PLIB_PORTS_PinClear() can clear a pin, and PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite() can do BOTH! That's amazing! ;-) http://microchipdeveloper.com/harmony:plib-api-ports is a better link. |
|
|
|
|
|
如果您检查生成的程序集代码，我确信集合和清晰版本将生成更高效的代码。
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 If you examine the assembly code produced, I'm pretty sure the set and clear versions will generate more efficient code. |
|
|
|
|
|
我一直在快速阅读，所以我错过了最新的参数，所以，现在它是有意义的，是的，我同意QHB是第一个更快。仍然怀疑写信给PORTx…（！）
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 I had been reading quickly so I missed the latest parameter So, well, now it makes some sense, and yep I agree with QHB being the first one faster. Still wondering about a Write to PORTx... (!) |
|
|
|
|
|
我猜当PinWrite不确定在编写代码时设置或清除PIN时应该使用。如果有人确定，那么PinSet /晴朗应该被使用。
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 i guess PinWrite should be used when one is not sure of setting or clearing the pin while writing the code. if one is sure about it, then PinSet/Clear should be used. |
|
|
|
|
|
如果我们谈论的是O1或更高，我相信你错了。我认为它们在大多数情况下是相等的。如果您提供一个常数第四参数toPLiBiPurthsPiWrrEnter（），编译器会将其优化为相同的代码ASPLIPHPORTSUPSESET（）OrpBixPosisSpIn（）。所有这些函数都是内联定义的，编译器将内嵌代码。然后，它能够识别类似的语句，并将其优化为两种情况中的一种。据我所知，编译器可以在-O1上完成这个操作。因此，PrimbPosisSpWordWrand（）与常数FoeTo参数和PLIPHPtassPin StUSER（）OrpBixPosisPin（）之间不会有区别。您可以在SSNOPS之间看到相同的11条指令，尽管一个示例使用2x PrCuffe（），另一个使用Pin StUSER（）和PcCurrar（）。如果您提供了一个变量第四参数toPLIPHPurthsPiWrrEnter（），则不能直接用PLIPHPurthsPin StUSER（）和PLIPBH.PursSpIn（）替换它。必须做你自己的if语句或其他什么，例如：我还没有测试过，但是这是相同的aspBixPosisPiWrnWrice（）正在做的。但是因为在其他情况下，调用不能逐个替换，它可能依赖于代码，甚至依赖于优化级别。例如，考虑这样的情况：这等于：我不知道编译器是否会将这两个例子与O-1相同的代码优化，因为编译器必须合并两个if情况（一个是代码，一个是在CopReWrE（）里面）。但我期望在更高的优化水平上也是如此。
以上来自于百度翻译 以下为原文 I'm believe you are wrong about this, if we talk about -O1 or higher. I think they are equal in most cases. If you provide a constant fourth parameter to PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite() the compiler will optimize it to the same code as PLIB_PORTS_PinSet() or PLIB_PORTS_PinClear(). All those functions are defined inline and the compiler will inline the code. Then it is able to recognize statements like if( constant_expression_evaluating_always_to_true_or_always_to_false ) { // some code } else { // some other code } and optimize it away into one of the two cases. As far as I know the compiler can already do this on -O1. Therefore, there won't be a difference between PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite() with constant forth parameter and PLIB_PORTS_PinSet() or PLIB_PORTS_PinClear(). I have attached two pictures with a short test. You can see the same 11 instructions between the SSNOPs although one example uses 2x PinWrite() and the other one uses PinSet() and PinClear(). If you provide a variable fourth parameter to PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite() you cannot directly replace it with PLIB_PORTS_PinSet() and PLIB_PORTS_PinClear() and you have to do your own if statement or whatever, for example: if(variable) { PLIB_PORTS_PinSet( /*parameters*/ ); } else { PLIB_PORTS_PinClear( /*parameters*/ ); } I haven't tested that one, but that is the same as PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite() is doing. But since the calls can not be replaced one-by-one in other cases, it might be dependent on your code and even the optimization level. For example, consider a situation like: if(variable) { // some code here PLIB_PORTS_PinSet( /*parameters*/ ); } else { // some other code here PLIB_PORTS_PinClear( /*parameters*/ ); } Which is equal to: if(variable) { // some code here } else { // some other code here } PLIB_PORTS_PinWrite( /*parameters*/, variable ); I don't know if the compiler will optimize even those two examples to the same code with -O1, because the compiler would have to merge two if-cases (the one with your code, and the one inside PinWrite()). But I expect that it will be the same with higher optimization levels. Attached Image(s) |
|
|
|
|
只有小组成员才能发言，加入小组>>
5242 浏览 9 评论
2031 浏览 8 评论
1955 浏览 10 评论
请问是否能把一个ADC值转换成两个字节用来设置PWM占空比？
3207 浏览 3 评论
请问电源和晶体值之间有什么关系吗？PIC在正常条件下运行4MHz需要多少电压？
2256 浏览 5 评论
778浏览 1评论
666浏览 1评论
有偿咨询，关于MPLAB X IPE烧录PIC32MX所遇到的问题
595浏览 1评论
PIC Kit3出现目标设备ID(00000000)与预期的设备ID(02c20000)不匹配。是什么原因
677浏览 0评论
576浏览 0评论
/6 
关注我们的微信
下载发烧友APP
德赢Vwin官网 观察
版权所有 © 湖南华秋数字科技有限公司
德赢Vwin官网 （电路图） 湘公网安备 43011202000918 号 电信与信息服务业务经营许可证：合字B2-20210191
工商网监
湘ICP备2023018690号
评论
淘帖
861
