Forum › MIFARE and NFC Reader IC`s › Configuring PN512 correctly › Reply To: Configuring PN512 correctly
Dear,
I got same problem here with NXP PN5120 which is currently working perfectly with LPC1769.
when running with NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic and NfcrdlibEx1_BasicDiscoveryLoop.
However, when integrate the PN5120 with Nucleo STM32 F030R8. I could not read the tags, the DiscLoop_run method always return NoTechDetected (refer the Poll_Mode in Discovery Loop).
I have no clue what is going on and how to solve the problem.
Anyone has any idea?
The code has been ported from NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic example with follow steps:
The SW run perfectly, the sequense commands are same with NXP sample.
Other question
Do we really need SetInterupt() function in NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic.c, I remmove the method and tags still can be detected using the LPC1769?
I got same problem here with NXP PN5120 which is currently working perfectly with LPC1769.
when running with NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic and NfcrdlibEx1_BasicDiscoveryLoop.
However, when integrate the PN5120 with Nucleo STM32 F030R8. I could not read the tags, the DiscLoop_run method always return NoTechDetected (refer the Poll_Mode in Discovery Loop).
I have no clue what is going on and how to solve the problem.
Anyone has any idea?
The code has been ported from NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic example with follow steps:
- Disable macro RTOS & PH_PlATFORM
- Compile the ReaderLib with SW4STM32 IDE.
- Base on STM sample project & SW4STM32 IDE, link to the ReaderLib.
- Port NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic.c, all the flow for Rc523 are retained, remove others HAL e.g 663, 5180
- Implement my own STM32 phbalReg, especially the Exchange method.
The SW run perfectly, the sequense commands are same with NXP sample.
- PN512 version return successful (0x82) when sending 0xEE (address 0x37h) 0
- TxControlReg return 0x80 which are same as Datasheet.
- However, tag can't be detected
Other question
Do we really need SetInterupt() function in NfcrdlibEx4_MIFAREClassic.c, I remmove the method and tags still can be detected using the LPC1769?
+ 0
|
- 0