Hi Uttam, Yes, now we use the primary set of I2C addresses in our application, and we do not use the second set of I2C addresses at this moment. But we really have to modify the circuit to avoid to coincide with the broadcast address, so we want to take this chance to clarify why and how the second set of I2C addresses is used , and also we want to make sure if there won't be the 3rd I2C slave address that we have to avoid to coincide with, in addition to the primary set of I2C addresses and the broadcast address. May I say that, after you tested DAC121C085 and you will test DAC101C085 later, if the second set of I2C addresses is not supported in both of these two devices, we can take it for granted that DAC101C081 (of the same family) does not support the second set of I2C addresses, neither? If so, I just wonder why the second set of I2C addresses was noted in the table? Please advise. Thanks in advance. Best Regards, Richard C.
↧