• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 100 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

MSPM0G3507: DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK wrong documentation

Petr Ledvina
Prodigy 10 points

Part Number: MSPM0G3507

Tool/software:

/** @enum DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK */
typedef enum {
    /*!  Last received data byte of a transaction is not ACKed automatically */
    DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK_ENABLE = I2C_MCTR_ACK_ENABLE,
    /*!  Last received data byte of a transaction is ACKed automatically */
    DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK_DISABLE = I2C_MCTR_ACK_DISABLE,
} DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK;
  • 0
    TI__Expert 5755 points

    Hi,

    I wonder what the problem with the above code you are referring to?

    Referring to the TRM, DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK_ENABLE is 0 which means "The last received data byte of a transaction is not acknowledged automatically by the Controller."

    Best Regards,
    Peter

  • 0 in reply to Peter Jiang
    Prodigy 10 points

    hw_i2c.h (as in datasheet):

    #define I2C_MCTR_ACK_DISABLE                     ((uint32_t)0x00000000U)         /* !< The last received data byte of a
                                                                                        transaction is not acknowledged
                                                                                        automatically by the Controller. */
    #define I2C_MCTR_ACK_ENABLE                      ((uint32_t)0x00000008U)         /* !< The last received data byte of a
                                                                                        transaction is acknowledged
                                                                                        automatically by the Controller. */


    Comment in  DL_I2C_CONTROLLER_ACK is exactly opposite. 

  • +1 in reply to Petr Ledvina
    TI__Expert 5755 points

    Already report it to the SW team, thanks for pointing out.

    Best Regards,
    Peter