• State TI Thinks Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 32 subscribers
  • Views 843 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.

TM4C123GH6ZRB: SSI Differential Clock & Data

Akash Patel
Expert 6245 points
Part Number: TM4C123GH6ZRB

Hi team,

I am looking through the datasheet for the TM4C123GH6ZRB and I see we have three supported formats for SSI: Texas Instruments Synchronous Serial, Freescale SPI, and MICROWIRE.

Is there a way to implement SSI with differential clock & data lines? If so, which of these formats would we use?

Regards,

Akash

  • 0
    TI__Guru 72500 points
    You can add differential drivers and receivers, but that does not affect the data format. It might impact the maximum clock speed. What is important is that both the master and the slave need to support the format you choose.
  • 0 in reply to Bob Crosby
    Guru 117855 points

    Should it be noted that,  Data Paths' (normal, "Dual Direction")  has been, "missed?"        It is suspected that one "Differential Line Driver" must be added to poster's sketch (as required by MOSI & MISO) - is not this true?

    And - the use of THREE such, "Differential Line Drivers" - at (both) Send & Receive Sites - suggests that the, "CAN Bus" (requiring just ONE Xcvr!) may deserve consideration!       ("CAN"  reduces the number of such transceivers/line drivers by FOUR (67%) - does it not?)

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Guru 27665 points
    Depends on the length and kind of data but not only CAN but also Ethernet and maybe even RS-422.

    Flexray and CAN-FD are in there too but those are probably a step or 10 too far.

    Robert
  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    Guru 117855 points

    Is it not doubtful that forcing (both) MISO & MOSI into a "single" Differential Line Driver will succeed?

    I continue in the belief that this fact - of some importance - has been, "missed."    (In addition - vendor will "move more components" - when adopting such cb1 guidance...)

    As (almost) always - insufficient data has arrived to enable the creation of an, "optimal solution."       And the "missing & required" extra line driver - deserves  address...