SAI CMSIS

[ali_asadzadeh]

Hi
This is my first hands on the SAI interface, here is my code

Code: [Select]

extern ARM_DRIVER_SAI Driver_SAI0;
ARM_DRIVER_SAI *SAI_drv=&Driver_SAI0;


void mySAI_callback(uint32_t event)
{
int x=0;
switch (event)
{
case ARM_SAI_EVENT_SEND_COMPLETE:
        /* Success: Wakeup Thread */
        x=0;
__breakpoint(0);
        break;

case ARM_SAI_EVENT_TX_UNDERFLOW:
        /* Success: Wakeup Thread */
        //__breakpoint(0);
x=1;
        break;

case ARM_SAI_EVENT_RECEIVE_COMPLETE:
        /* Success: Wakeup Thread */
        //__breakpoint(0);
x=2;
        break;

case ARM_SAI_EVENT_FRAME_ERROR:
        /* Success: Wakeup Thread */
        //__breakpoint(0);
x=3;
        break;

case ARM_SAI_EVENT_RX_OVERFLOW:
        /* Success: Wakeup Thread */
        //__breakpoint(0);
x=4;
        break;

}

SAI_drv->Send(wave_data,64);
}


void main (void)
{
SAI_drv->Initialize(mySAI_callback);
SAI_drv->PowerControl(ARM_POWER_FULL);
// configure Transmitter to Asynchronous Master: I2S Protocol, 16-bit data, 16kHz Audio frequency
SAI_drv->Control(ARM_SAI_CONFIGURE_TX |
                             ARM_SAI_MODE_MASTER  |
                             ARM_SAI_ASYNCHRONOUS |
                             ARM_SAI_PROTOCOL_I2S |
                             ARM_SAI_DATA_SIZE(16), 0, 16000);

// enable Transmitter
SAI_drv->Control(ARM_SAI_CONTROL_TX, 1, 0);
SAI_drv->Send(wave_data,64);
while(1)
{
}
}
the problem is that after calling SAI_drv->Control(ARM_SAI_CONTROL_TX, 1, 0); the callback would get called with the ARM_SAI_EVENT_TX_UNDERFLOW,  no matter how I do the things, I wanted to know do you have any idea what's going on wrong? the callback would not be called any more for continuous data transfer

[westfw]

You mean like this: https://www.keil.com/pack/doc/CMSIS/Driver/html/group__sai__interface__gr.html ?
Wasn't most the CMSIS 2.x Driver middleware stuff deprecated in CMSIS 3.x (and we're now up to v4)?  AFAIK, few of the chip vendors actually implemented the middleware layers - After all, their proprietary peripheral implementations were their big product differentiators, and I don't think they liked having their "superior" implementations reduced to a common abstraction...

In any case, to have a hope of debugging/helping with this, we need to know which chip you are using!

[ali_asadzadeh]

Yes I mean using that, the actual chip I'm using is LPC4337 from  NXP.