Eric Blossom wrote:
> Still remaining are: > * gluing mblocks and flow graphs together in the same system Part of this includes the scheduler, right? When we get to the point of the scheduler I want to toss it up for discussion. Or we can just toss it up for discussion now :D I haven't been fully convinced by the BBN doc that it's the kind of scheduler we want and that we can't get a scheduler that inter-operates with both m-blocks and traditional blocks. When we first started working on the in-band project and we were looking in to the BBN doc, something struck us wrong about the scheduler. (us being me and Thibaud) We think its catering too much to the m-block when you can create a scheduler that can operate with other blocks users might create that desire priority queues. Basically, we see increased complexity in the system by running two schedulers, one of which caters to a specific block type. On top of that, two schedulers is going to add additional scheduling overhead. We want to either mash them together and try to build a scheduler that works with both types of blocks, or at least not cater the new scheduler so much to m-blocks, but to make m-blocks work with it. We're not sure what's 100% feasible and not, which is where you come in :D But we think it's at least worth some more discussion. - George _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
