kw47 lpuart

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

kw47 lpuart

439 Views
wjw2026
Contributor II

Hi:

Modify and verify the serial communication based on the official routine kw47loc_wireless_uart_freertos. Only modify Uart_RxCallBack and baud rate. The modifications are as follows: 

wjw2026_0-1782379752847.pngwjw2026_0-1782379752847.png

For the convenience of testing at present, 20 bytes are sent each time through the serial port. The test found that when the baud rate is lower than 256000, there are no problems with both receiving and sending. When the baud rate is set to 460800 or higher, the kw47 sends normally, but packet loss occurs during reception. 

Could you please check if I'm using it improperly and give me some guidance? 

Also, why is there no kw47loc_freertos_lpuart_cm33_core0 routine in sdk_26_03_00? 

Thank you! 

 

0 Kudos
Reply
1 Reply

196 Views
sofiaurueta
NXP Employee
NXP Employee

Hello,
hope you are doing well.

 

Could you clarify what behavior/functionality you are trying to validate? Are you evaluating the maximum supported UART baud rate or implementing an application that echoes received data?

From your modified Uart_RxCallBack function, have you tested whether the packet loss still occurs if SerialManager_WriteBlocking() and Serial_Print() are removed from the callback (or handle the transmit operation elsewhere in the application context rather than directly inside the callback) and only the received byte count is recorded? 

This could help determine whether the packet loss is related to the UART/LPUART itself or to the additional processing added in the callback. At higher baud rates, operations such as blocking writes and debug prints may delay the receive path and contribute to data loss.

 

Also, you mention kw47loc_freertos_lpuart_cm33_core0, are you referring to an example project that was available in a previous SDK release? If so, which SDK version contains the example you are comparing against?

 

Best regards,
Sofia.

0 Kudos
Reply