Garst R. Reese wrote:
Talking to myself again :)
There is a problem is in basic_clock.h
DIVA0 is defined as 0x10
DIVA1 is defined as 0X20
DIVA_0 is defined as (0<<4)
DIVA_2 is defined as (1<<4)
My dumb code was
BSCTL1 = DIVA1, which divided the clock by 4.
BSCTL1 = DIVA0 would still divide it by 2.
BSCTL1 = DIVA_0 is correct in my case.
In the user manual, the bits are labled DIVA.1 and DIVA.0
That might be better than DIVA0 and DIVA1 in terms of making it more
idiot proof.
Thanks to all,
Our defines follow TI's header files as closely as possible. What you
see above is what they do. Like anything that has evolved over time,
their headers are a mixture of smart and dumb things. This apsect of
their naming could well be considered dumb, but its too late to change
it now :-\
Regards,
Steve
