You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello there,
This might be more of a question than an issue. I'm confused about the following part, where the nop; instruction is used to archive the data line timings.
Could it be that the timings are mixed up? Because for a 1, 94 nop;'s are 800ns and 50 are 450ns whereas for the 0, 92 nop;'s are 850ns and 56 are 400ns :
one:
800ns: 94 nop;
450ns: 50 nop;
zero:
400ns: 56 nop;
850ns: 92 nop;
Shouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, more instructions should take longer, right 😅 ? Or does it take the duration of other instructions into account?
Unfortunately I don't have an oscilloscope to test it, that's why I'm asking here.
Thanks in advance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hello there,
This might be more of a question than an issue. I'm confused about the following part, where the
nop;
instruction is used to archive the data line timings.Adafruit_NeoPixel/Adafruit_NeoPixel.cpp
Lines 2594 to 2639 in d0f3109
Could it be that the timings are mixed up? Because for a
1
, 94nop;
's are 800ns and 50 are 450ns whereas for the0
, 92nop;
's are 850ns and 56 are 400ns :one:
800ns: 94 nop;
450ns: 50 nop;
zero:
400ns: 56 nop;
850ns: 92 nop;
Shouldn't it be the other way around? I mean, more instructions should take longer, right 😅 ? Or does it take the duration of other instructions into account?
Unfortunately I don't have an oscilloscope to test it, that's why I'm asking here.
Thanks in advance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: