yet another issue, really sorry PWM related.

[Mangy_Dog]

This behavior is normal according to the reference manual.

There are two ways to solve your issue:
1 - your workaround
2 - choose an update value of 65535 for the timers. In this case, when the compare value is greater than or equal the update value, the output will be a clean "1", without a glitch.

While my work around is probably fine for this project, it is more efficient to get the PWM to behave, as i guess I expect :p

What do you mean about option 2? Choose an update value? My Duty is already set to 65535? "pwmWrite(pin,65535)"

[stevestrong]

With pwmWrite() you set the compare value, not the reload/update value which the compare value is compared with to generate the PWM signal.
Using TimerX.setOverflow() you can set the reload value of the timer corresponding to the PWM pin.

[Mangy_Dog]

So setting the serOverflow, to 65534 will keep the PIN high with no dip at the top duty cycle?

[stevestrong]

According to the reference manual (see RM0008 page 318 text above figure 84), setting the compare value (pwmWrite()) to a higher value than the reload/update value will keep the output pin high.
So yes, if you setOverflow() to 65534 and pwmWrite() to 65535, this should match your requirement.

P.S. I was wrong in my previous post, the value should be higher than the compare value for "1" at output.

[Mangy_Dog]

According to the reference manual (see RM0008 page 318 text above figure 84), setting the compare value (pwmWrite()) to a higher value than the reload/update value will keep the output pin high.
So yes, if you setOverflow() to 65534 and pwmWrite() to 65535, this should match your requirement.

P.S. I was wrong in my previous post, the value should be higher than the compare value for "1" at output.

Cool now i get you... Fair enough to save some effort ill just set the compare one bit down so it keeps it high