Yes, Thanks

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Josh Blum <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On 01/23/2013 12:18 PM, Guy Holtzman wrote:
> > Hi Again, and thanks for you answer :) . (I was out yesterday, so I did
> not
> > see your answer)
> >
> > As I understood the lead time is a jitter buffer inside the USRP, which
> > buffers the samples before it launches them to the air. This buffer is
> > limited by the FPGA memory. for example, if one  configures the lead time
> > to a too large number, it will cause an over run.
> > since B100 uses a smaller FPGA, and does not have SRAM memory, is it
> > possible that the lead time that could be configured is limited to a
> number
> > which is smaller than the jitter? I know it depends on the host computer
> > and on the application running on it. in other words, is there
> > a reasonable margin to play with?
>
> Actually its the opposite, too little, and you would see an underflow.
> Too large, lets say to buffer on the device, then the production of
> transmit samples backs up onto the host, so its a non issue.
>
> >
> > could you please send the Presentation file which is seen on the video,
> it
> > cannot be found on git.
> >
>
> This presentation?
>
> https://github.com/guruofquality/grextras/blob/f02da842d31c55c44510117efa0ba5f82e2fca90/pre_cog_pres.pdf
>
> -josh
>
>
> > Thanks Again,
> > Guy
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:09 PM, John Malsbury <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Guy,
> >>
> >> Sorry for the the delayed response.  You seem to have a reasonable
> >> understanding of the way timestamps and tags are working in GNU Radio.
> >>
> >> Here's a basic overview of how the pre-cog TDMA block works.  To get a
> >> sense of time the block reads samples from a UHD source.  When streaming
> >> starts, the UHD source block issues a rx_time and rx_rate tags.  After
> >> receiving these tags, the block will count sample to maintain knowledge
> of
> >> the USRP time.
> >>
> >> The block will schedule a transmission to occur based on several
> >> parameters - slot interval and count, guard interval, etc.  To ensure
> that
> >> the tagged samples arrive to the USRP DSP chains before the transmit
> time
> >> passes, the block will produce the frame and output sometime before that
> >> transmit time.  The parameter 'lead_limit' sets how far in advance the
> >> block will produce the frame, and should be set to the worst case delay
> >> caused by process timing jitter on the host and interface  latency.
>  IIRC,
> >> I've tested this with 1-5 ms slots, 2-10 slots per frame, and a lead
> limit
> >> of about 5 ms with the USRP N210.  Typical data rates I tested were
> >> between  250 kbps to 1 mbps.  You might specify a different lead limit
> with
> >> the B100.
> >>
> >> The demo I've run uses 1 PPS to sync the USRPs.  In theory, with a few
> >> small modifications, you could set the USRP time based on time of
> received
> >> frames instead.  You will need to understand and account for additional
> >> latency when you set the time of the USRPs, and your guard intervals
> will
> >> probably need to be larger.
> >>
> >> This TDMA implementation is mostly a proof-of-life.  I'll be glad to
> help
> >> you get something running, and can advise on worthwhile improvements to
> >> this implementation.  Porting to C++ is one obvious suggestion to
> improve
> >> performance.
> >>
> >> -John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 6:16 AM, Guy Holtzman <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am thinking of developing a TDMA MAC + PHY using GNURadio for low
> speed
> >>>  communication (upto 200KBits per second) for prototyping. since
> OpenBTS
> >>> has successively implemented a GSM BS using GNURadio, this seems to be
> >>> a reasonable choice. but unlike OpenBTS, I want to avoid HW (clock
> changes)
> >>> or FPGA programming and develop only on the GNURadio Platform.
> >>>
> >>> recently I have seen the pre-cog (or EasyMAC) project presentation
> using
> >>> the USRP N210:
> >>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF_4dFQHAZE
> >>>
> >>> wiki:
> >>> https://github.com/jmalsbury/pre-cog/wiki
> >>>
> >>> as I understood (and you are welcomed to correct me if I am wrong), UHD
> >>> provides a timestamp  (and tags) functionality for sending IQs and
> >>> for receiving IQs, so all the latency and jitter problems will likely
> come
> >>> from the host side (Drivers and GNU Radio application)
> >>> since I do not need high speed data, the USB speed is more than
> enough. I
> >>> do not know what limitations I will experience using this platform.
> >>>
> >>> I don't have any USRP devices on my hands yet, due to that fact I have
> a
> >>> few questions regarding the use of USRP B100 (and not USRP N210):
> >>>
> >>>    1. What will be the expected latency using USB  what will be the
> >>>    maximum  jitter (unexpected latency)?, I have read the FAQ, but it
> is too
> >>>    theoretical, and the paper from 2007 could be out of date (
> >>>    http://gnuradio.org/redmine/projects/gnuradio/wiki/UsrpFAQLatency )
> >>>    2. The USRP1 had accuracy problems with the clock when using
> OpenBTS,
> >>>    was this problem solved with USRP B100? in other words, could two
> or more
> >>>    USRPs work on a TDMA network without an external common clock?
> >>>    3. what will be the minimum acceptable time slot duration on a
> system
> >>>    that does not require ACK mechanism?
> >>>    4. on a system that requires ACK response  what would be a minimum
> >>>    considerable time from a packet being sent until the ACK is
> received?
> >>>    5. Are the timestamps for Rx and Tx on the same USRP correlated?
> >>>    6.  Are there any other considerations which can prevent EasyMAC or
> a
> >>>    similar implementation  from working?
> >>>    7. I know GNU Radio is not a true Real-time platform when running on
> >>>    linux General Purpose CPUs, how will this effect the TDMA?
> >>>
> >>> Thank you very much, and sorry for the long email  :)
> >>>
> >>> Regards, Guy
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio

Reply via email to