From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Sun,  7 Nov 2010 14:42:00 -0500
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <cd0fa0ecfdb6663d86cf23330307fd16@plug.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <4CD6FFD4.9040502@gmx.net>
References: <4CD5F934.2080705@gmx.net>
	<AANLkTi=6NRT9zMa8+p8mTw+uqi0PKf3wwwYnqfEA28-1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CD69C49.5090209@gmx.net>
	<9f6f706b0da2fc0b208ad49c097a823b@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<4CD6D235.3030704@gmx.net>
	<1ab89ced7625309d8c289292c4a4086c@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<4CD6FFD4.9040502@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] pcc limitation?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 78e8a204-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> In practice:
> Right now (with incomplete support for some chips):
> writearr: 260 bytes
> readarr: 16777217 bytes
>
> In the near future (maybe 2 weeks from now):
> writearr: 1056 bytes
> readarr: 16777217 bytes

so you're saying that you have > 16777217 bytes of spi data for a single
command in your program?  i think i'm missing something.  you couldn't
fit that much data in 32kb of ram.

- erik