> > *Have you experimented with buffer size? is there any optimal value > calculation? Would it have any impact on the result, Like if we keep a > larger buffer and than directly take that buffer that way it would be > faster? I have currently kept 1k.*
Yeah sorry, I'm kind of in my own world here at the moment. Anyway, like I mentioned above I was speaking of the ADC FIFO. As for buffering into system RAM, this is certainly possible, and very likely preferable. This can also be done, very easily, using POSIX shared memory. Potentially, this is a problem, as once the data is in RAM, how do you get it back out for transport. Without using additional CPU cycles, or using the PRU's ? Not using the PRU's for this by the way, is a constraint I've placed on myself. Just to see if it is *reasonably* possible. Indeed, I do believe it is possible, but not quite sure how reasonable that possibility *is*. - Yet. On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:34 PM, William Hermans <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, the buffer I'm talking about is the ADC buffer. I've been looking > through others code for PRU -> ADC, and have been attempting to translate > that. I'm afraid my ASM skills are very lacking for this task( I have not > written ASM code in years ). However the constants used in much of the code > out there, are the same. So while I do not yet know what LBBO, and stuff > liek r0-r31 mean for program flow, I can figure out the addressing very > quickly. Not to mention that the TRM has this information too, but the TRM > is very terse reading for many things. It's great for "cherry picking" > offsets, but much of the information is not presented in an order that > makes the most sense to me. ie, you have to bounce around too much form one > place to another in this *huge* manual . . . > > So, I may have to take a break, and get to know the PRU assembly language > well before proceeding much further. Which is something I intended on doing > anyhow, just not right at this moment. One thing that has me excited here > is an idea that came to me last night. Concerning using the PRU's in a way > I've not seen anyone else do - yet. Well, I've seen mention of others > touching on the subject I suppose, but . . . yeah I do not want to let my > "secrete" out just yet. > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Rathin Dholakia <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi William, >> >> Oh, I had already seen that and experimented with it..!!but had >> forgotten, after watching your link I recollected. I am really sorry for >> silly question. >> >> Have you experimented with buffer size? is there any optimal value >> calculation? Would it have any impact on the result, Like if we keep a >> larger buffer and than directly take that buffer that way it would be >> faster? I have currently kept 1k. >> >> And yes, Priority is a priority!! I though you were on break from >> BBB,...!! :-) >> >> Sincerely, >> Rathin >> >> -- >> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "BeagleBoard" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BeagleBoard" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
