Greetings,
In attempting to aid a poster - trying to implement, 'Hardware Oversampling' w/in the TM4C123 MCU - the following was discovered. Credit our (independent) firm's 'Jennifer' - w/this discovery - which intends to serve multiple others - if indeed the conflict proves 'real.' (which both Jennifer & I believe - it is!)
The conflict appears w/in the ADC Function: 'ADCClockConfigSet()' and is first described - then introduced below:
//*****************************************************************************
//
//! Sets the clock configuration for the ADC.
//!
//! \param ui32Base is the base address of the ADC to configure, which must always be \b ADC0_BASE.
Yet - when this function is examined - the following reveals:
void
ADCClockConfigSet(uint32_t ui32Base, uint32_t ui32Config,
uint32_t ui32ClockDiv)
{
//
// Check the argument.
//
ASSERT((ui32Base == ADC0_BASE) || (ui32Base == ADC1_BASE));
ASSERT((ui32ClockDiv - 1) <= (ADC_CC_CLKDIV_M >> ADC_CC_CLKDIV_S));
It would appear - that the (expanded) acceptance of ADC1_BASE - occurred post this Function's (Preamble) or Description... And that this (new) broader ADC Module acceptance - negates the 'must always be' (restriction) - w/in the function's description!