处理器和包含的头文件之间不匹配

什么版本的MPLABX，和谐，MHC？哪个芯片？PIC32 MX695F512H？MPLABX显示包含的内容可能是也可能不是真的。编译器对它进行单独的解析。您有问题或出错。



      以下为原文

    What Version of MplabX, Harmony, MHC?
which chip? pic32mx695f512h?
 
MplabX showing something as included may or may not be true.
The Compiler does it own separate parse.
 
Are you having a problem, or getting an error.

MPLABX：V3.55和谐：V1.10MHC:V1.0.100芯片：PIC32-MX-695F 512HI看到ADC和计时器之间的冲突。我知道您建议我避免和谐定时器，但我想首先了解SysthTMRSySytKyTcGET（）总是在何处返回。现在我可以看到初始化ADC驱动程序（在AppInIt或AppIn初始化中）会导致对SysTrM.C到OC中的对SysSytTMRMARARMCALLACK（）的调用。当我初始化ADC驱动程序时，HySeSyStCyCube保持在0，但是当我不初始化DC驱动程序时，SysStCyt确实增加了。现在我只需要知道为什么…



      以下为原文

    MPLABX: v3.55
Harmony: v1.10
MHC: v1.0.10.0
Chip: PIC32-MX-695F-512H
 
I am seeing a conflict between the ADC and the Timer. I know you recommended that I avoid the Harmony Timer but I want to understand first where / why SYS_TMR_sysTickCountGet() always returns zero.
 
Now I can see that initialising the ADC Driver (either in APP_INIT or in APP_Initialize) results in calls to _SYS_TMR_AlarmCallback() in sys_tmr.c to not occur, and hence sysTickCount remains at zero, but only when I initialise the ADC Driver.
 
When I do not initialise the DC Driver, sysTickCount does increment correctly.
 
Now I just need to figure out WHY..
 
 

当然，不会忘记，SySTMSTECOUNT被声明为易失性的，因此它也可能被另一外部资源（例如寄存器）所设置。



      以下为原文

    Not forgetting of course, that sysTimerCount is declared volatile, so it may well be getting set also by another external resource (e.g. register)
 

临时添加：“警告你在这里：TMRYP32 MX695F512L”到两个地方的代码，看看编译器看到什么。这个消息将出现在构建中。如果它是错误的，那么它是MPLABX、XC32还是Orthor。然后在那个论坛发表文章。如果你没有回音，然后写一张票。如果你厌倦了等待：然后自己修好。你可以使用你想要的所有和谐的计时器。我对它们的看法并不影响你，我没有发现它们坏了。我发现我需要很多函数调用来做一个简单的超时。而动态的“计时器”不允许我保证我已经足够了（我有一个MZ和AM在RAM中游泳）。核心计时器是快速和容易的。从一个附加项目的计时器代码比谐波实现更干净。



      以下为原文

    Temporarily add:
#warning "You are here: tmr_p32mx695f512l"
To the code in both places and see what the compiler sees.
That message will show up in the Build.
 
If it is wrong figure out if it is MplabX, XC32, or Harmony.  
Then Post in that forum.
If you do not hear back:
Then write a ticket.
If you get tired of waiting:
Then Fix it yourself.
 
You can use all the Harmony Timers you want. My opinion of them does not affect you.
I did not find them broken.  I found I needed to many function calls to do a simple timeout.  And the dynamic "timers" did not allow me to insure I had enough (I have an MZ and am swimming in RAM).
The CORE Timer was quick and easy. And the timer code from an add on project was much cleaner than Harmonies implementation.