水星STM32F429与新起点EP4C FPGA之间进行SPI通信

Mr13

求大佬发一下这两个板子之间进行SPI通信，接线怎么接啊，最好有图，FPGA上用来进行SPI通信的接口都找不到，是用普通的IO口吗

fdj007

一个作为主机，一个作为从机，按照SPI协议，谁主谁从都行。至于FPGA，通用IO引脚就可以作为SPI传输引脚，并没有专用的SPI引脚

Mr13

萌新求大佬带

peng1554

帮顶~~

QinQZ

FPGA的引脚除了几个专用引脚外，绝大部分引脚都是通用IO，可以任意分配的

guohua19768

希望有借鉴的必要。

1786950949

In 2010, a federal judge shook America’s biotech industry to its core.

Companies had won patents for isolated DNA for decades—by 2005 some 20% of human genes were

patented.

But in March 2010 a judge ruled that genes were unpatentable.

Executives were violently agitated.

The Biotechnology Industry Organisation (BIO), a trade group, assured members that this was just a

“preliminary step” in a longer battle.

On July 29th they were relieved, at least temporarily.

A federal appeals court overturned the prior decision, ruling that Myriad Genetics could indeed hold

patents to two genes that help forecast a woman’s risk of breast cancer.

The chief executive of Myriad, a company in Utah, said the ruling was a blessing to firms and patients

alike.

But as companies continue their attempts at personalised medicine, the courts will remain rather busy.

The Myriad case itself is probably not over.

Critics make three main arguments against gene patents: a gene is a product of nature, so it may not be

patented; gene patents suppress innovation rather than reward it; and patents’ monopolies restrict access to genetic tests such as Myriad’s.

A growing number seem to agree.

Last year a federal task-force urged reform for patents related to genetic tests.III--⑥In October the Department of Justice filed a brief in the Myriad case, arguing that an isolated DNA molecule “is no less a product of nature... than are cotton fibres that have been separated from cotton seeds.”

Despite the appeals court’s decision, big questions remain unanswered.

For example, it is unclear whether the sequencing of a whole genome violates the patents of individual

genes within it.

The case may yet reach the Supreme Court.

As the industry advances, however, other suits may have an even greater impact.

Companies are unlikely to file many more patents for human DNA molecules—most are already patented or in the public domain.

Firms are now studying how genes interact, looking for correlations that might be used to determine the

causes of disease or predict a drug’s efficacy.

Companies are eager to win patents for “connecting the dots,” explains Hans Sauer, a lawyer for the BIO.

Their success may be determined by a suit related to this issue, brought by the Mayo Clinic, which the

Supreme Court will hear in its next term.

The BIO recently held a convention which included sessions to coach lawyers on the shifting landscape

for patents.

Each meeting was packed.

BB

31.It can be learned from Paragraph 1 that the biotech companies would like .

[A] their executives to be active

[B] judges to rule out gene patenting

[C] genes to be patentable

[D] the BIO to issue a warning

32.Those who are against gene patents believe that.

[A] genetic tests are not reliable

[B] only man-made products are patentable

[C] patents on genes depend much on innovation

[D] courts should restrict access to genetic tests

33.According to Hans Sauer, companies are eager to win patents for.

[A] establishing disease correlations

[B] discovering gene interactions

[C] drawing pictures of genes

[D] identifying human DNA

34.By saying “Each meeting was packed” (Line 4,Para. 6), the author means that.

[A] the supreme court was authoritative

[B] the BIO was a powerful organisation

[C] gene patenting was a great concern

[D] lawyers were keen to attend conventions

35.Generally speaking, the author’s attitude toward gene patenting is.

[A] critical

[B] supportive

[C] scornful

[D] objective

1786950949

Even in traditional offices, “the lingua franca of corporate America has gotten much more emotional and much more right-brained than it was 20 years ago,” said Harvard Business School professor Nancy Koehn.

She started spinning off examples.

“If you and I parachuted back to Fortune 500 companies in 1990, we would see much less frequent use of terms like journey, mission, passion.

There were goals, there were strategies, there were objectives, but we didn’t talk about energy; we didn’t talk about passion.”

Koehn pointed out that this new era of corporate vocabulary is very “team”- oriented—and not by

coincidence.

“Let’s not forget sports—in male-dominated corporate America, it’s still a big deal.

It’s not explicitly conscious; it’s the idea that I’m a coach, and you’re my team, and we’re in this

together.

There are lots and lots of CEOs in very different companies, but most think of themselves as coaches and this is their team and they want to win.”

These terms are also intended to infuse work with meaning—and, as Rakesh Khurana, another professor, points out, increase allegiance to the firm.

“You have the importation of terminology that historically used to be associated with non-profit

organizations and religious organizations: terms like vision, values, passion, and purpose,” said Khurana.

This new focus on personal fulfillment can help keep employees motivated amid increasingly loud

debates over work-life balance.

The “mommy wars” of the 1990s are still going on today, prompting arguments about why women

still can’t have it all and books like Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In, whose title has become a buzzword in its own right.

Terms like unplug, offline, life-hack, bandwidth, and capacity are all about setting boundaries between

the office and the home.

But if your work is your “passion”, you’ll be more likely to devote yourself to it, even if that means

going home for dinner and then working long after the kids are in bed.

But this seems to be the irony of office speak: Everyone makes fun of it, but managers love it, companies depend on it, and regular people willingly absorb it.

As a linguist once said, “You can get people to think it’s nonsense at the same time that you buy into it.”

In a workplace that’s fundamentally indifferent to your life and its meaning, office speak can help you

figure out how you relate to your work—and how your work defines who you are.

31.According to Nancy Koehn, office language has become

[A] more emotional

[B] more objective

[C] less energetic

[D] less strategic

32.“Team”-oriented corporate vocabulary is closely related to

[A] historical incidents

[B] gender difference

[C] sports culture

[D] athletic executives

33.Khurana believes that the importation of terminology aims to

[A] revive historical terms

[B] promote company image

[C] foster corporate cooperation

[D] strengthen employee loyalty

34.It can be inferred that Lean In

[A] voices for working women

[B] appeals to passionate workaholics

[C] triggers debates among mommies

[D] praises motivated employees

35.Which of the following statements is true about office speak?

[A] Managers admire it but avoid it.

[B] Linguists believe it to be nonsense.

[C] Companies find it to be fundamental.

[D] Regular people mock it but accept it.