Re: Positional/physical addressing

Liste des GroupesRevenir à e design 
Sujet : Re: Positional/physical addressing
De : liz (at) *nospam* poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham)
Groupes : sci.electronics.design
Date : 25. Jun 2025, 09:52:30
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Poppy Records
Message-ID : <1reha1p.j8hxjptkp4cgN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid>
References : 1
User-Agent : MacSOUP/2.4.6
Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:

I have a large group (hundreds) of switches and displays.
Their state needs to be determined/updated rather slowly
(a few hertz).  Each has local smarts so it can retain
some state information and processing capability.
 
Their physical arrangement varies from one installation to
the next.  So, there is no economy of scale available by
"settling" on a specific configuration or physical arrangement.
 
I would like to be able to address them (the entire *set*) -- and
pass data to/fro -- with a small, fixed number of conductors /having
built them all identically/.  The amount of data exchanged being
traded off vs.  update rate for a given interface bandwidth.
 
The obvious "one wire" scheme would have a gazinta and cumzouta
for each device so the device could modify a serial bit stream
to account for its "position" in that stream.
 
I can pipeline processing between devices so the overall access
rate remains high (though latency obviously suffers).
 
But, a single device failure renders all downwind devices
inaccessible (or, possibly ALL devices, depending on implementation)
 
I'm looking at a two wire solution that piggybacks the data
stream on power and ground (those "two wires").  But, it
adds complexity to the devices (I want to keep them REALLY
small and dirt cheap)
 
Any existing schemes that allow this without the failure mode cited?

Philips I2c  ?

--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

Date Sujet#  Auteur
24 Jun 25 * Positional/physical addressing25Don Y
24 Jun17:18 +* Re: Positional/physical addressing8Martin Rid
24 Jun17:49 i`* Re: Positional/physical addressing7Don Y
24 Jun18:05 i `* Re: Positional/physical addressing6Don Y
24 Jun19:18 i  +* Re: Positional/physical addressing4Jeroen Belleman
25 Jun18:30 i  i`* Re: Positional/physical addressing3Ian
25 Jun18:43 i  i +- Re: Positional/physical addressing1Don Y
25 Jun22:29 i  i `- Re: Positional/physical addressing1Jeroen Belleman
24 Jun22:36 i  `- Re: Positional/physical addressing1Don Y
25 Jun09:52 +* Re: Positional/physical addressing11Liz Tuddenham
25 Jun10:14 i`* Re: Positional/physical addressing10Don Y
25 Jun11:14 i `* Re: Positional/physical addressing9Liz Tuddenham
25 Jun18:04 i  `* Re: Positional/physical addressing8Don Y
26 Jun09:59 i   +* Re: Positional/physical addressing4Liz Tuddenham
26 Jun10:46 i   i`* Re: Positional/physical addressing3Don Y
26 Jun17:53 i   i `* Re: Positional/physical addressing2Liz Tuddenham
26 Jun21:48 i   i  `- Re: Positional/physical addressing1Don Y
26 Jun20:58 i   +* Re: Positional/physical addressing2bitrex
26 Jun21:50 i   i`- Re: Positional/physical addressing1Don Y
26 Jun21:00 i   `- Re: Positional/physical addressing1bitrex
25 Jun18:40 +* Re: Positional/physical addressing4Ian
25 Jun20:41 i`* Re: Positional/physical addressing3Don Y
25 Jun21:35 i `* Re: Positional/physical addressing2Dennis
25 Jun22:53 i  `- Re: Positional/physical addressing1Don Y
25 Jun19:25 `- Re: Positional/physical addressing1john larkin

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal