SAADC, any advantage of using PPI for start_on_end?

RE: SAADC, any advantage of using PPI for start_on_end?

dejans — Mon, 29 Jan 2024 11:59:21 GMT

Hi,

Delay might happen if double buffering is used.
In case when start_on_end=true, latching of second buffer is performed by the code executing in the SAADC IRQ handler when END event for the first buffer is triggered. If there is some other IRQ which executes with higher priority, latching of the second buffer might be delayed and some analog samples might be lost.
If start_on_end=false is used, and START task is connected with the END event using (D)PPI, then latching of the second buffer happens as soon as possible, eliminating the risk of losing analog samples.

Best regards,
Dejan

RE: SAADC, any advantage of using PPI for start_on_end?

tpg — Fri, 26 Jan 2024 13:59:16 GMT

Of course, you find the documentation for the nrfx SAADC driver here.

Example code is under modules/hal/nordic/nrfx/samples/src/nrfx_saadc of your installation.

RE: SAADC, any advantage of using PPI for start_on_end?

dejans — Fri, 26 Jan 2024 13:52:06 GMT

Hi,

[quote user=""]there two methods in documentation and in the examples.[/quote]

Could you please provide relevant links to the documentation and examples?

Best regards,
Dejan