PaulS:
That doesn't make sense. Doing the CRC8 calculation on the data being printed does, sort of.
Yes, the data being printed.
Maybe another way of asking is:
How do you recommend I rewrite the following code to allow for CRC checking with the OneWire library's CRC function?
void sendTempSensorData(Print *destination, boolean debug){
if (debug) destination->print(F("\r\n"));
destination->print(F("ESPID:"));
destination->print(ESP.getChipId());
destination->print(F(",RSSI:"));
destination->print(WiFi.RSSI());
destination->print(",VCC:");
destination->print(int(float(ESP.getVcc()) / 9.2857));
destination->print(F(",tempupdate:"));
if (tempSensorCount > 0){
for (byte i=0;i<tempSensorCount;i++){
destination->print(tempSensorReadings[i].bin);
destination->print(F(";"));
destination->print(tempSensorReadings[i].sensor);
destination->print(F(";"));
destination->print(tempSensorReadings[i].tempC);
if (i < tempSensorCount-1) destination->print(F(":"));
}
} else {
destination->print(F("nosensors"));
}
destination->print(F(",CRC:"));
byte data[] = {'E','S','P','I','D'}; // test data
destination->print(OneWire::crc8(data,5));
destination->print(F("\n"));
if (debug) destination->print(F("\r"));
delay(50);
}
From OneWire.cpp
#if ONEWIRE_CRC
// The 1-Wire CRC scheme is described in Maxim Application Note 27:
// "Understanding and Using Cyclic Redundancy Checks with Maxim iButton Products"
//
#if ONEWIRE_CRC8_TABLE
// This table comes from Dallas sample code where it is freely reusable,
// though Copyright (C) 2000 Dallas Semiconductor Corporation
static const uint8_t PROGMEM dscrc_table[] = {
0, 94,188,226, 97, 63,221,131,194,156,126, 32,163,253, 31, 65,
157,195, 33,127,252,162, 64, 30, 95, 1,227,189, 62, 96,130,220,
35,125,159,193, 66, 28,254,160,225,191, 93, 3,128,222, 60, 98,
190,224, 2, 92,223,129, 99, 61,124, 34,192,158, 29, 67,161,255,
70, 24,250,164, 39,121,155,197,132,218, 56,102,229,187, 89, 7,
219,133,103, 57,186,228, 6, 88, 25, 71,165,251,120, 38,196,154,
101, 59,217,135, 4, 90,184,230,167,249, 27, 69,198,152,122, 36,
248,166, 68, 26,153,199, 37,123, 58,100,134,216, 91, 5,231,185,
140,210, 48,110,237,179, 81, 15, 78, 16,242,172, 47,113,147,205,
17, 79,173,243,112, 46,204,146,211,141,111, 49,178,236, 14, 80,
175,241, 19, 77,206,144,114, 44,109, 51,209,143, 12, 82,176,238,
50,108,142,208, 83, 13,239,177,240,174, 76, 18,145,207, 45,115,
202,148,118, 40,171,245, 23, 73, 8, 86,180,234,105, 55,213,139,
87, 9,235,181, 54,104,138,212,149,203, 41,119,244,170, 72, 22,
233,183, 85, 11,136,214, 52,106, 43,117,151,201, 74, 20,246,168,
116, 42,200,150, 21, 75,169,247,182,232, 10, 84,215,137,107, 53};
//
// Compute a Dallas Semiconductor 8 bit CRC. These show up in the ROM
// and the registers. (note: this might better be done without to
// table, it would probably be smaller and certainly fast enough
// compared to all those delayMicrosecond() calls. But I got
// confused, so I use this table from the examples.)
//
uint8_t OneWire::crc8(const uint8_t *addr, uint8_t len)
{
uint8_t crc = 0;
while (len--) {
crc = pgm_read_byte(dscrc_table + (crc ^ *addr++));
}
return crc;
}
#else
//
// Compute a Dallas Semiconductor 8 bit CRC directly.
// this is much slower, but much smaller, than the lookup table.
//
uint8_t OneWire::crc8(const uint8_t *addr, uint8_t len)
{
uint8_t crc = 0;
while (len--) {
#if defined(__AVR__)
crc = _crc_ibutton_update(crc, *addr++);
#else
uint8_t inbyte = *addr++;
for (uint8_t i = 8; i; i--) {
uint8_t mix = (crc ^ inbyte) & 0x01;
crc >>= 1;
if (mix) crc ^= 0x8C;
inbyte >>= 1;
}
#endif
}
return crc;
}
#endif