5
\$\begingroup\$

I asked this question over at stack overflow but found this in a few of the comments on some of the microchip questions, https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3276297/communicating-with-the-pic-16f913

Here is my issue, it appears that all the communication lines for the PIC 16F913 reside on the same set of pins, this is convenient in that I don't have to sacrifice GPIO pins just to do comms, however the problem I'm having now is if I'm using the SPI on the chip, how can I send information to the RS232?

The reason this issue came up, is that I just bought a CAN bus chip that communicates over SPI, and I would really like to see the data on RS232, so I can see messages. (I really don't know much about CAN yet, so who knows if this even makes sense yet).

Here are the options I see, and maybe someone else has better ideas that I'm just simply missing.

Somehow setup a time scheme that will switch between SPI and RS232 every time I get data, -- This doesn't seem hard and should work, but supposing I don't want to miss a message, what if a message is written while I'm writing to RS232, is it possible I'll miss it?

2.. I can always use SPI, but then build my own comm bus over 8 of the GPIO lines, to another PIC 16F913, using only the GPIO lines and then since the RS232 lines are free on the second PIC I can simply read the data and spit it out.

-- This one is doable but now we're wasting 2 chips, AND all the GPIO lines,

There has to be a better way. Or is there?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

I would like to also clarify, obviously one solution is using a completely different chip (which may in fact be what I end up doing, if I can get the 18F programmed), however, I'm interested in worst case scenario, in which I am limited in resources and only have some 913's, is the way described above the only way to do it with this chip, or is there a better way?

\$\endgroup\$
6
\$\begingroup\$

You could use those pins for SPI, and implement a software UART on another pair of pins. I've done that before now when I needed two UARTs on a chip that only had one hardware UART.

You need to "bit-bang" the software UART. I tried to post some code I've used but it doesn't get formatted properly. Here is an example.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Any links to such a thing? I haven't ever implemented such a thing and don't know where I would start. \$\endgroup\$ – onaclov2000 Jul 19 '10 at 13:04
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ What compiler are you using? There is a good chance the compiler you are using will do software uart for you. \$\endgroup\$ – Kellenjb Jul 19 '10 at 14:46
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ hitech c I believe, whichever the free version is, and in mplab at that. \$\endgroup\$ – onaclov2000 Jul 19 '10 at 20:35
4
\$\begingroup\$

To answer the first question I got to. If you have a device on SPI and after reading from it you are writing to UART.

You cannot "miss" a message while writing to UART because if you are master on SPI the other device must wait for you. If it is a device that samples quickly and constantly you just have to ensure that you sample it more often then it will replace it's values. If it is a device that holds data for you in a buffer you should be able to switch back and forth easily.

I am quite used to doing this action, at work We have a device with two communication channels. One channel has 5 different devices it can control, 4 on SPI, one on UART. The other channel has two. One on SPI, one on UART. The code is a bit more complex, as the firmware controllers for each device must ask for access to resources and receive them before doing anything, but the system still works perfectly.

I would suggest you take a quick shot at just switching. You should be able to implement it fast enough.

The other option is to make a software UART. This can be quite doable. It is called bit-banging normally and is very common practice if it is just for debug and not needed for a final product.

I would suggest bit banging to be lazy. People often overlook bit-banging.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ You know I have heard of bit banging, but never bothered to look it up, after seeing the wiki entry, it's an interesting concept, and suspect that may be a future project for myself to improve my skills, thank you for that!!! \$\endgroup\$ – onaclov2000 Jul 19 '10 at 20:41
  • \$\begingroup\$ It may look exciting but you will very quickly add it to your repertoire and move on. I do congratulate you taking the time to do it. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Jul 20 '10 at 2:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.