Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote: > > Yeah something's not right there, 190 us is way too long. > > > Hm, these numbers come from 'halcmd show param hm2_7i43.*.time', which I > thought was in nanoseconds, but looking at hal_lib.c I see that it's in > CPU clock cycles. Is that intentional? > > In hal_lib.c's thread_task(), it calls rtapi_get_clocks() instead of > rtapi_get_time(). > > <http://cvs.linuxcnc.org/cvs/emc2/src/hal/hal_lib.c?rev=1.59> > > > Mine's a 2.6 GHz CPU, so 190 cycles is about 74 microseconds. With the > 50% margin we've been working with that's 3 KHz, which is a little better. > Ahh, I measure this stuff with a logic analyzer. But, those numbers seem much more reasonable! (Darn, thought I had a competitive advantage, he he!) > > Each EPP cycle takes right around 1 us on my test system. > I can get down to about 800 ns with mo-bo parport, and 640 or so with a PCI parport.
Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
