next topic »

[on:]

Hello all,

is it possible to reset millis() to zero? because millis() will overflow in about 9 hours, it is better to let it go to zero in a controlled enviroment at a convenient time is stead of in the middle of a calculation.

[Reply #1 on:]

Instead of using millis(), you could use timer0_overflow_count directly.  Just add this toward the top of your sketch:

    extern volatile unsigned long timer0_overflow_count;

The only tricky bit is that it will not be quite milliseconds.  Each increment of timer0_overflow_count is 125/128 of a millisecond, or 0.9765625 milliseconds.  But the nice thing is that it will take a lot longer for this to overflow:  48.5 days by my calculations.

You would also have to avoid any runtime function that uses millis(), such as delay().

[Reply #2 on:]

If you add the line that CosineKitty suggested, you could just stick a:

Code:

timer0_overflow_count = 0;

in your code somewhere.  And delay() should still work okay.

[Reply #3 on:]

To go off on a tangent a little bit, I wondered when  I saw the source code that functions like millis() did not disable interrupts while accessing timer0_overflow_count:

Code:

unsigned long millis()
{
    // (comments omitted)
    return timer0_overflow_count * 64UL * 2UL / (F_CPU / 128000UL);
}

Because it requires multiple atmega8 instructions to fetch the value of a 4-byte long integer like timer0_overflow_count, isn't it possible for a timer interrupt to occur in the middle of those instructions and mess up the result?  I wonder if the following might make the code safer:

Code:

unsigned long millis()
{
    // (comments omitted)
    unsigned long safe_copy;

    cli();    
    safe_copy = timer0_overflow_count;
    sei();

    return safe_copy * 64UL * 2UL / (F_CPU / 128000UL);
}

Likewise, to reset the timer to zero, it might be better to do:

Code:

cli();
timer0_overflow_count = 0;
sei();

[Reply #4 on:]

so, to be on the safe side, i would use

Code:

extern volatile unsigned long timer0_overflow_count;

in my declarations

and reset it with

Code:

timer0_overflow_count = 0;

anytime i want in my code.

[Reply #5 on:]

Yep, that should work.  

[Reply #6 on:]

i guess this is kind of the same topic: any idea how to get a "time" reading much more precise than millis()? i'm trying to get a time difference between 2 inputs but would need to be able to measure microseconds, rather than milliseconds. is there a register i can read directly? thanks.

[Reply #7 on:]

You could speed up the timer that's incrementing the millis().  They won't be milliseconds any more, of course.

Putting this line in your setup should make it run 8 times as fast:

Code:

TCCR0 &= ~(1 << CS00);

Or this one should speed things up by a factor of 64:

Code:

TCCR0 &= ~(1 << CS01);

Don't use them both, though, or you'll turn the timer off completely.

For the ATmega168 (Arduino Mini), replace the TCCR0 with TCCR0B.

[Reply #8 on:]

thanks mellis. i will try the 64 factor. ideally i would be able to tap into the microseconds. i was thinking that since there is a delaymicroseconds() function, there has to be a microseconds counter somewhere... is that the case? anyway, thanks for your answer.

[Reply #9 on:]

The delayMicroseconds() just uses a busy wait loop of the right duration; there's no microsecond counter.

[Reply #10 on:]

ok, thanks. i'll try your trick to accelerate by 64 then. cheers!