Terminology for Embedded Protocols

Mtech1

Junior Member level 1
Joined
Mar 18, 2023
Messages
18
Helped
0
Reputation
0
Reaction score
0
Trophy points
1
Activity points
176
I have a quick question regarding the terminology used in common embedded protocols like UART, SPI, and I2C, and I would appreciate your input.

Which of the following phrasing is technically most accurate?

  1. "The sender sends a bit, and the receiver receives it."
  2. "The sender sets the line, and the receiver monitors it."
  3. "The sender writes to the line, and the receiver reads it."
From my understanding, "The sender writes to the line, and the receiver reads it" seems most appropriate, especially for SPI and I2C. However, I would like to confirm if this aligns with your perspective or if there's a better phrasing.
 

Only phrase 1 applies to UART, SPI, and I2C. Even this is arguable, as we normally refer to maybe a byte sent and received, all be it as bits on the "line"

SPI and I2C require at least 2 lines (by my own personal definition of "line"). I2C and SPI signals might be referred to as a "bus".

Phrase 3 is usually only true for I2C if the send address matches receiver address. Phrase 2 might well be true for I2C

We could argue all day over the meanings of poorly defined terms. Context is everything.

Can't think of better phrasing right now, but again, I would consider context before suggesting anything better

Trying to make all "embedded protocols" fit a generic description just causes confusion in my opinion, and is unhelpful to understanding

Just the term "embedded protocols" seems vague and almost meaningless to me

Sorry

Edit: if you are producing a paper, then maybe show us the relevant section of your paper to give context and perhaps allow me or others to give better ideas for improvement.
 
Last edited:

It seems to me that you’re getting your bloomers in a bunch over nomenclature. Why are you asking this question? We need some context.
 

Hi,

What is a interface, what is a protocol?

An interface is the hardware that supports the basic functions of type the communication path.
All three (UART, I2C, SPI) use shift registers .. and maybe (digital) filters and the signal drivers.

A protocol describes the meaning of the bits, maybe timing, maybe other functions like arbitration and parity generation...

Thus I´d say UART and SPI are clear interfaces and no protocols. No meaning of a bit is defined.

I2C is both, since the standard describes the electrical interface, as well as timing, arbitration and meaning of bits. It also describels when which driver is active or not.
It always satrts with START, then ADDRESS, then DIRECTION ... then data.

UART describes just the basic function of serializing deserializing the data (stream).
It can be used with different baud rates, different charater bit widths, parity or not. You can use UART with a wire as medium, but also POF, glas fiber, IR via air, ...
It can be used with different signal drivers, like RS232, RS485, RS488 ...
It can be used with different protocols like MODBUS, PROFIBUS, fro printers, for modems...

With humans:
* the "interface is": mouth, tongue, vocal cords, lips .. but also the air ... and the ear, with all it´s detailes .. to the nerves.
* the "protocol" is: the language.

You may use different protocols with one interface.
You may use different interfaces with one protocol.

Klaus

Klaus
 

Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…