Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add +++ for escape and auto-baud rate #1

Open
samighi opened this issue Oct 9, 2014 · 4 comments
Open

Add +++ for escape and auto-baud rate #1

samighi opened this issue Oct 9, 2014 · 4 comments

Comments

@samighi
Copy link

samighi commented Oct 9, 2014

We should add +++ to reset the chip and auto select baud rate

@igrr
Copy link
Member

igrr commented Oct 9, 2014

Any particular reason why +++?
It's normally an escape sequence used to return from data mode to command mode.
IIRC, AT+IPR=0 triggers baud rate detection.
There's an UART_AUTOBAUD register in ESP8266, I will poke around and see how it works.

@mstempin
Copy link

mstempin commented Oct 9, 2014

I agree with @igrr, the +++ sequence should be reserved for its standard purpose.

@samighi
Copy link
Author

samighi commented Oct 9, 2014

that is fine (RE: +++). Do we have (tested) an auto baud selector? type it in and chip will match speed? 

On Oct 09, 2014, at 10:34 AM, Michel Stempin [email protected] wrote:

I agree with @igrr, the +++ sequence should be reserved for its standard purpose.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.=

@igrr
Copy link
Member

igrr commented Oct 9, 2014

Not sure how that would work.
On ESP8266 you have to explicitly enable autobaud mode. Having a command that would enable autobaud mode looks a bit pointless — if your baud rate doesn't match the baud rate set on the chip's uart, the command will not be interpreted correctly. And if the rates match, there's no reason to enable autobaud mode.
So the only use case would be to turn autobaud mode on firmware start. But we don't need a command for that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants