I want to read a String in Arduino from the keyboard outside of the loop() method.
I have the following method:
void readFromKeyboard(byte arrayAddress[])
{
int count = 0, i = 0;
while ((count = Serial.available()) == 0);
while (i<count)
{
arrayAddress[i++] = Serial.read();
}
}
In the loop() method I am calling it like:
readFromKeyboard(userInput);
where userInput is a byte[];
The problem is that when I input more than one characters it read the 1st character initially and it call the readFromKeyboard again an then reads the rest.
Example; if I input "asdf":
--the 1st time it will do ==> userInput = "a"
--the 2nd time it will do ==> userInput = "sdf"
I have tryed many things but the same happens again and again...
Any suggestions??
So that's what worked:
In the loop():
while(Serial.available() == 0);
delay(100);
readInputFlag = readFromKeyboard(userInput);`
And in the readFromKeyboard method:
void readFromKeyboard(byte arrayAddress[])
{
int i = 0;
while (Serial.available() > 0)
{
arrayAddress[i++] = Serial.read();
}
}
This delay, in the loop method, somehow makes the Serial get the whole string instead of just the first letter.
I know you got it working, but I wanted to show you something that I use to deal with this issue. This is a two-tiered delay system for catching bytes that come in a bit late for whatever reason. It's designed to minimize the delay needed to accomplish that task.
int received_length = 0;
byte serial_incoming_buffer[200];
while(Serial.available()) {
serial_incoming_buffer[received_length++] = Serial.read();
if(!Serial.available()) {
delay(3);
if(!Serial.available()) {
delay(20);
}
}
}
Sometimes the Arduino falls behind in picking up serial from the sender and sometimes it grabs serial too fast. Sometimes the sender lags a little bit. This code will wait 3 ms for more bytes, and if they come in it goes back to receiving as many as are available having only had that very brief delay. This repeats as necessary, then when 3 ms goes by without anything being available, it waits a bit longer (20 ms here) for more bytes. If nothing comes in after the long delay, then the transmission is most likely done and you can safely move on.
I recommend tweaking the delays based on your baud rate.
Related
I am new to Arduino programming and was trying to make an IR-controlled WS2812 led strip light, everything works fine apart from when I try to stop the for-loop when my IR receiver gets a new decoded value. It does get the job done but the received values are different every time. when I tested the same controller with a simple IR receiver program everything worked fine.
switch(value){
case 16720095:
delay (200);
irrecv.resume();
for (int i = 0; i <= 182; i++) {
leds[i] = CRGB (0,0,0);
FastLED.show();
if (irrecv.decode(&results))
{
value = results.value;
Serial.println(value);
break;
}
delay(40);
}
}
}
and the serial outputs:
first time:
16720095
-1572362453
second time:
16720095
-1406992986
third time:
16720095
811035822
It looks like you need to call "irrecv.resume()" within the if (irrecv.decode(&results)) block in order to tell the driver to keep looking for signals. The second values you are getting are garbage because you are asking it to provide data it hasn't received/ prepared.
hello i try to make an interruption in my arduino code to execute only one time a part of it. i use 2 while loop, the first is suppose to detecte when i press a button and the second when i release it. between the two the code i want to execute only one time for one press.
but even if the condition of the while is good it don't want to stop.
my serial monitor
my code :
void loop()
{
long button = cs_4_6.capacitiveSensor(5);
while(button < 1000)
{
long button = cs_4_6.capacitiveSensor(5);
Serial.println(button);
Serial.println("not ok");
}
if(nbButton[3] == 0)
{
nbButton[counter] = 1;
counter++;
}
else
{
int nbButton[] = {0, 0, 0, 0};
}
while(button > 1000)
{
long button = cs_4_6.capacitiveSensor(5);
Serial.println(button); // print sensor output 2
Serial.println("ok");
}
delay(50);
}
You are declaring long button each time in your while loops. As you are already declaring it at the beginning of your loop there is no need to do it at any other place. The while loops are taking your first declaration, which is not changing, whereas the Serial.print takes the new one defined only in the while loops.
In your two while loops change long button = cs_4_6.capacitiveSensor(5); to button = cs_4_6.capacitiveSensor(5);
Hope it helps,
I am trying to build a simple FLASH memory programmer (for 39SF020A) using my arduino mega. I wrote the C code and Python script to send the data over (And it all works as expected).
I need to transfer about 32k of hexadecimal data, but with my settings only 10k of data took about 4 minutes (115200 BAUD), which i found unnecessary long. Currently, i am sending over serial (from Python) my value with a terminator (i chose '$'), so for exmple '3F$'. adresses are calulated on the arduino, so no need to send them.
In my arduino code, i have
String received_string = Serial.readStringUntil('$');
and after programming every byte to teh FLASH using arduino, it sends back a '\n' to let the Python know, that it is ready to receive next byte (the python is waiting for receiving a 'line' and then continues). I am not really sure if this is a way to do it, if sending only one byte at the time is good idea and if not, how many and how do i parse them on the arduino? Is the feedback loop useful?
Thanks.
Python Code:
('file' contains all data)
for item in file[1:]:
ser.write((item + "$").encode("ascii"))
line = ser.readline()
i += 1
if i >= top:
break
elif (i % 100) == 0:
print(i)
Arduino code (just part of it)
if (Serial.available() > 0){
String received_string = Serial.readStringUntil('$');
programData(received_string.toInt(),program_adress);
program_adress++;
}
void programData(char data_in, unsigned long adress)
{
digitalWrite(OE,HIGH);
digitalWrite(CE,LOW);
writeByte(0xAA, 0x5555);
writeByte(0x55, 0x2AAA);
writeByte(0xA0, 0x5555);
writeByte(data_in, adress);
Serial.print("\n"); // Feedback for Python
delayMicroseconds(30); // Just to be on the safe side
}
void writeByte(char data_in, unsigned long adress)
{
setDataAs(OUTPUT);
digitalWrite(OE,HIGH);
digitalWrite(WE,HIGH);
setAdress(adress);
setData(data_in);
digitalWrite(WE,LOW);
delayMicroseconds(1);
digitalWrite(WE,HIGH);
}
// Sets data BUS to input or output
void setDataAs(char dir){
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < data_size ;i++) pinMode(data[i],dir);
}
// Sets data to specific values
void setData(char data_i){
setDataAs(OUTPUT);
for (int i = 0; i < data_size;i++) { digitalWrite(data[i],bitRead(data_i,i)); }
}
void setAdress(long adr){
// Set all adresses
for (int i = 0; i < adresses_size;i++)
digitalWrite(adresses[i],bitRead(adr,i));
}
I have an Arduino and an APC220 wireless transceiver. I'm writing a library that reads in data from the APC using the SoftwareSerial class. I originally started with the (incorrect) code below that was causing a seg fault because the i variable is incremented even when there is no data available to read. In cases where it happened to work (by chance when the data was immediately available), this function took approximately 6 milliseconds to execute. When I put the i++; statement in its proper place (above the closing brace immediately above it), the function takes over 270 ms to run. Speed is crucial for this function, so I'm wondering what it is about that statement's placement that causes such a dramatic increase in time.
For the code below, buff is declared as char buff[10]; and sSerial is an instance of SoftwareSerial
unsigned long updateLocation(Marker* marker) {
this->sSerial->print('~');
//initiate request from vision system
this->sSerial->flush();
this->sSerial->print('#');
this->sSerial->print(marker->num);
this->sSerial->print('*');
this->sSerial->flush();
unsigned long start = millis();
int state = 0, i = 0;
while((millis() - start) < 600) {
if(this->sSerial->available()) {
buff[i] = this->sSerial->read();
if(buff[i] == ',') {
buff[i] = 0;
switch(state) {
case 0:
i = -1;
state++;
break;
case 1:
marker->x = atof(buff);
i = -1;
state++;
break;
case 2:
marker->y = atof(buff);
i = -1;
state++;
break;
case 3:
marker->theta = atof(buff);
i = -1;
return (millis() - start);
break;
default:
return 0;
break;
}
}
// Correct location for i++; takes 270 ms to execute
}
// Incorrect location for i++; Takes 6 ms to execute
i++;
}
this->sSerial->print('~');
this->sSerial->flush();
return 0;
}
Assuming that there's data ready and waiting from sSerial, there's no effective difference in the placement of i++.
You said yourself, in most cases the data isn't ready. With the incorrect placement of i++, i quickly grows to greater than the size of buff which causes the segfault.
With the correct placement, your code blocks for up to 600ms waiting for enough data to come in to reach case 3 and return. On average, you're seeing that it takes 270ms for that to happen.
You can test this theory yourself by timing the same function operating directly on a string rather than reading in from serial.
You may want to a) increase your baud rate b) check to see if there's a more efficient software serial implementation you can use c) switch to hardware serial. If you are only using hardware serial currently for debugging output, you can switch that around. Use an FTDI adapter ($6-10 on eBay) to pipe software serial to USB and reserve the hardware serial for your time sensitive function.
You might also be able to reconfigure your code so it doesn't block the whole time waiting. You can read in what's available, store it in a global and go back to your main loop to do something else until there's data available again.
edit: I see now that the APC220 is 9600 baud max. That's pretty slow, so the bottle neck may not be software serial (but you should test it). If the bottle neck is simply the baud rate, you will need to look at optimizing your code not to block waiting for input if there are other things your system can work on while it's waiting.
I'm new to the PSoC board and I'm trying to read the x,y,z values from a Digital Compass but I'm having a problem in beginning the Transmission with the compass itself.
I found some Arduino tutorial online here but since PSoC doesn't have the library I can't duplicate the code.
Also I was reading the HMC5883L datasheet here and I'm suppose to write bytes to the compass and obtain the values but I was unable to receive anything. All the values I received are zero which might be caused by reading values from wrong address.
Hoping for your answer soon.
PSoC is sorta tricky when you are first starting out with it. You need to read over the documentation carefully of both the device you want to talk to and the i2c module itself.
The datasheet for the device you linked states this on page 18:
All bus transactions begin with the master device issuing the start sequence followed by the slave address byte. The
address byte contains the slave address; the upper 7 bits (bits7-1), and the Least Significant bit (LSb). The LSb of the
address byte designates if the operation is a read (LSb=1) or a write (LSb=0). At the 9
th clock pulse, the receiving slave
device will issue the ACK (or NACK). Following these bus events, the master will send data bytes for a write operation, or
the slave will clock out data with a read operation. All bus transactions are terminated with the master issuing a stop
sequence.
If you use the I2C_MasterWriteBuf function, it wraps all that stuff the HMC's datasheet states above. The start command, dealing with that ack, the data handling, etc. The only thing you need to specify is how to transmit it.
If you refer to PSoC's I2C module datasheet, the MasterWriteBuf function takes in the device address, a pointer to the data you want to send, how many bytes you want to send, and a "mode". It shows what the various transfer modes in the docs.
I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER Perform complete transfer from Start to Stop.
I2C_MODE_REPEAT_START Send Repeat Start instead of Start.
I2C_MODE_NO_STOP Execute transfer without a Stop
The MODE_COMPLETE_XFRE transfer will send the start and stop command for you if I'm not mistaken.
You can "bit-bang" this also if you want but calling directly on the I2C_MasterSendStart, WriteByte, SendStop, etc. But it's just easier to call on their writebuf functions.
Pretty much you need to write your code like follows:
// fill in your data or pass in the buffer of data you want to write
// if this is contained in a function call. I'm basing this off of HMC's docs
uint8 writeBuffer[3];
uint8 readBuffer[6];
writeBuffer[0] = 0x3C;
writeBuffer[1] = 0x00;
writeBuffer[2] = 0x70;
I2C_MasterWriteBuf(HMC_SLAVE_ADDRESS, &writeBuffer, 3, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
while((I2C_MasterStatus() & I2C_MSTAT_WR_CMPLT) == 0u)
{
// wait for operation to finish
}
writeBuffer[1] = 0x01;
writeBuffer[2] = 0xA0;
I2C_MasterWriteBuf(HMC_SLAVE_ADDRESS, &writeBuffer, 3, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
// wait for operation to finish
writeBuffer[1] = 0x02;
writeBuffer[2] = 0x00;
I2C_MasterWriteBuf(HMC_SLAVE_ADDRESS, &writeBuffer, 3, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
// wait for operation to finish
CyDelay(6); // docs state 6ms delay before you can start looping around to read
for(;;)
{
writeBuffer[0] = 0x3D;
writeBuffer[1] = 0x06;
I2C_MasterWriteBuf(HMC_SLAVE_ADDRESS, &writeBuffer, 2, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
// wait for operation to finish
// Docs don't state any different sort of bus transactions for reads.
// I'm assuming it'll be the same as a write
I2C_MasterReadBuf(HMC_SLAVE_ADDRESS, readBuffer, 6, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
// wait for operation to finish, wait on I2C_MSTAT_RD_CMPLT instead of WR_COMPLT
// You should have something in readBuffer to work with
CyDelay(67); // docs state to wait 67ms before reading again
}
I just sorta wrote that off the top of my head. I have no idea if that'll work or not, but I think that should be a good place to start and try. They have I2C example projects to look at also I think.
Another thing to look at so the WriteBuf function doesn't just seem like some magical command, if you right-click on the MasterWriteBuf function and click on "Find Definition" (after you build the project) it'll show you what it's doing.
Following are the samples for I2C read and write operation on PSoC,
simple Write operation:
//Dumpy data values to write
uint8 writebuffer[3]
writebuffer[0] = 0x23
writebuffer[1] = 0xEF
writebuffer[2] = 0x0F
uint8 I2C_MasterWrite(uint8 slaveAddr, uint8 nbytes)
{
uint8 volatile status;
status = I2C_MasterClearStatus();
if(!(status & I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER))
{
status = I2C_MasterWriteBuf(slaveAddr, (uint8 *)&writebuffer, nbytes, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
if(status == I2C_MSTR_NO_ERROR)
{
/* wait for write complete and no error */
do
{
status = I2C_MasterStatus();
} while((status & (I2C_MSTAT_WR_CMPLT | I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER)) == 0u);
}
else
{
/* translate from I2CM_MasterWriteBuf() error output to
* I2C_MasterStatus() error output */
status = I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER;
}
}
return status;
}
Read Operation:
void I2C_MasterRead(uint8 slaveaddress, uint8 nbytes)
{
uint8 volatile status;
status = I2C_MasterClearStatus();
if(!(status & I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER))
{
/* Then do the read */
status = I2C_MasterClearStatus();
if(!(status & I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER))
{
status = I2C_MasterReadBuf(slaveaddress,
(uint8 *)&(readbuffer),
nbytes, I2C_MODE_COMPLETE_XFER);
if(status == I2C_MSTR_NO_ERROR)
{
/* wait for reading complete and no error */
do
{
status = I2C_MasterStatus();
} while((status & (I2C_MSTAT_RD_CMPLT | I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER)) == 0u);
if(!(status & I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER))
{
/* Decrement all RW bytes in the EZI2C buffer, by different values */
for(uint8 i = 0u; i < nbytes; i++)
{
readbuffer[i] -= (i + 1);
}
}
}
else
{
/* translate from I2C_MasterReadBuf() error output to
* I2C_MasterStatus() error output */
status = I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER;
}
}
}
if(status & I2C_MSTAT_ERR_XFER)
{
/* add error handler code here */
}
}