Alright thanks for the feedback. It sounds like I have some work to do.

v/r,
Rich

On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 1:01 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:

>  It's not unique to modern DSP systems, either.
>
> When we put together a bit-regenerating repeater for 56kbit packet "back
> in the day", we had to design an elastic hardware buffer to "soak up"
> slight differences in RX and TX clocks--the RX bit clock was from the
> remote station, and TX bit-clock was ours.  The elastic buffer worked OK
> over the modest frame sizes we were using, but couldn't soak up skew
> indefinitely....
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2015-06-18 15:53, Nick Foster wrote:
>
> We call this the "two clock problem". This is something people (including
> myself) have been talking about implementing for ages. There's nothing
> available in GNURadio right now to do this.
>
> --n
>
>  On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:51 PM Richard Bell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>    Hi all,
>>
>> I'm working on a system that has hardware defining an input rate and
>> hardware defining an output rate. This is a data based system, so I can't
>> afford to lose any bits, which implies sample rate changes have to be
>> exact.
>>
>> For example, if data is being input at 2.4 ksps and the USRP outputs data
>> at 468.168 ksps, unless my intermediate sample rate changes produce a
>> perfect mapping between the two rates, I can expect a buffer under or
>> overflow eventually, which would produce problems.
>>
>> One solution to this problem, would be to use an arbitrary resampler
>> before the USRP, that consists of a PLL dynamically changing the sample
>> rate of the arbitrary resampler based on how full it's output buffer is. If
>> the buffer is above half full, decrease your sample rate, if the buffer is
>> below half full, increase your sample rate.
>>
>> Now the question. I assume I'm not the first person that has needed to do
>> something like this, is there a built in mechanism to handle this problem
>> already or do I have to create the feedback loop structure myself? I'd
>> rather not re-invent the wheel.
>>
>> v/r,
>> Rich
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing 
> [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