So here's a question, particularly for POCs. Is "master" a problematic word when not juxtaposed with "slave"? My guess is not, because the word has a much broader meaning in English, but I'd like to hear your thoughts.
Show this thread
-
For example, it's entirely reasonable for a *master" SPI device to be polling commands to run from a "slave" SPI device. Sorry, the terminology is bad here, as it is in most overloaded usages of "master"/"slave".
For SPI, something like *host/device" would be easier to understand than "master/slave" (where the host implies more responsibility; in this case, driving the clock and chip selects). For I²C, since multiple devs can drive the bus, "initiator/target" or "/responder" works well.
-
-
You basically just illustrated my point. I'm not very knowledgeable about either SPI or I2C, but using host/device or initiator/target tells me lots of information about the topology that I didn't previously know. Master/slave is lazy and gatekeeps PoC from our community.
-
In another thread
@azonenberg and I were trying to come up with situations of "total control" where a slavery reference might be, if undesirable, at least *accurate*... and the only one we could think of is JTAG debugging. Bu the common term is "debug target" there.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.