pps (un)lock_iolock

[jpc]

i have the impression that in the current implementation ( mp dsPIC pro compiler) of the peripheral pin select library the unlock_iolock and the lock_iolock are part of the pps_mapping function. The inconvenience is that we cannot use the IOL1WAYconfigurationbit protection .

[slavisa.zlatanovic]

Hi!

This has already been discussed here.

[jpc]

ok, if i would have seen that post i could have continued there, the main objection agains including them in the library is that you cannot use the configuration-level protection against spurious remapping of pins. Before ever there was a ME-pps-library i used my own ( based upon yo2lio 's work) and i still can use that. The direct writing to the remapping registers is probably the most efficient option.

[slavisa.zlatanovic]

Hi!

I'm not sure that I understood you properly.

...the unlock_iolock and the lock_iolock are part of the pps_mapping function. The inconvenience is that we cannot use the IOL1WAY configuration bit protection.

Please, explain it in more details.

IOL1WAY Configuration bit must be cleared in order to use the PPS_Mapping successively.
"The state of the IOLOCK bit can only be changed once an unlocking sequence has been executed. In
addition, if the IOL1WAY Configuration bit is ‘1’, once the IOLOCK bit is set, it cannot be cleared."

[jpc]

IOL1WAY Configuration bit must be cleared in order to use the PPS_Mapping successively.
"The state of the IOLOCK bit can only be changed once an unlocking sequence has been executed. In
addition, if the IOL1WAY Configuration bit is ‘1’, once the IOLOCK bit is set, it cannot be cleared."

exactly, as demonstration of the current situation look at http://www.mikroe.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 45#p134345

[garrisond]

good post!