-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19.5k
Enhancement of PWM, with dithering #6100
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
thinkyhead
merged 5 commits into
MarlinFirmware:RCBugFix
from
thinkyhead:rc_soft_pwm_dither
Mar 24, 2017
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2aed66a
temperature: Fix SOFT_PWM off by one
StefanBruens 35a55d5
SOFT_PWM: Implement dithering if SOFT_PWM_SCALE is 1 or more
StefanBruens 0a74774
soft_pwm: avoid useless refetches of pwm_count
StefanBruens 6a040a6
SOFT_PWM: Do not switch off heaters twice on pwm_count wraparound
StefanBruens 043be28
Use "& 0x3F" instead of "% 64"
thinkyhead File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not:
constexpr uint8_t pwm_mask = ENABLED(SOFT_PWM_DITHER) ? _BV(SOFT_PWM_SCALE) - 1 : 0;
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Unfortunately
ENABLED()
cannot be used that way. Only in preprocessor expressions.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Have you tried it?
after the preprocessor run the code reads as follows:
constexpr uint8_t pwm_mask = 1 ? 1 : 0;
which is both syntactically and semantically correct.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have indeed. The
ENABLED
macro uses preprocessor voodoo that only works in preprocessor expressions.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The preprocessor is always run! "ENABLED(...)" by itself is a preprocessor expression, which is expanded prior to the compilation itself.
If you want to see the output of the preprocessor, pass "-E" to gcc.
I tried it, checked the created preprocessor output, and checked the generated assembly. If it does not work for you, whats the error message?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code:
Error:
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nonexistent macros are expanded as their literal text. This is fine in a preprocessor expression, because non-existent macros (in this case
SWITCH_ENABLED_THINGS
) are treated as a value of 0, and the preprocessor doesn't throw an error.Well, it is a macro that will be expanded. "Preprocessor expressions" (sorry if I get the terminology wrong) are evaluated in lines beginning with
#if
and other such directives. Hence you can't say:bool q = defined(YOMAMA);