Replies: 1 comment 9 replies
-
The buss will be shared and hard to say what the effect would be without trying it for real. I don't think it will be a problem though.
I think buffering/caching them in RAM is a good idea.
The UWB rates are pretty dynamic and varies between modes so it is hard to answer. You could check the loco.spiWr and loco.spiRe log variables. However testing for real is probably the best method. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hello everyone,
I'm currently working on a project involving the
integration of a Winbond W25Q128JV SPI flash
with theCrazyflie
platform. The goal is to create acustom deck
for storinglong trajectories
of formations and executing them without interference. However, I'm facing some confusion regarding the use of the SPI1 line, especially considering simultaneous usage with the Loco deck.Here are my main concerns and questions:
SPI1 Line Usage: Is it acceptable to utilize the SPI1 line for connecting the Winbond SPI flash while simultaneously using the Loco deck? I want to ensure that there won't be any conflicts or performance issues.
Trajectory Execution: The primary aim of integrating the SPI flash is to store long trajectories of formations and execute them seamlessly. How can I ensure that the read and write operations to the flash memory do not interfere with the real-time execution of stored trajectories?
UWB Deck Interference: Additionally, I would like to know the rate of fetching position data from the UWB deck and the position calculation loop rate. Understanding these rates will help me assess any potential interference with SPI flash operations.
I would greatly appreciate any insights, experiences, or advice from those who have worked with similar setups or have expertise in Crazyflie development. Feel free to share your thoughts on the technical aspects, best practices, or potential challenges I might encounter.
Thank you in advance for your contributions!
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions