To drive step motors, I suggest you tu use special card with a chipset
like a PMD chipset (http://www.pmdcorp.com/). I use a home made card
but you probably can found a commercial card.
Richard
>----------
>From: WANGNICK Sebastian[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Friday, April 16, 1999 6:28 AM
>To: Realtime Linux
>Subject: [rtl] General remark, enhancements, and some questions
>
>Dear all,
>
>first of all thank you for this excellent work. Realtime Linux
>is really an astonishing and remarkable piece of workmanship.
>
>I am looking for a platform to drive a three axis stepper motor
>milling machine, and neither DOS nor Linux would fit my needs
>of generating parallel port signals at high rates. I'm currently
>driving a small milling machine with a maximum step rate of about
>1000/s; my intention is to drive another one which has a maximum
>step rate of 11700/s. I hope RT-Linux will perform fast enough
>for the latter, but I assume an ISA 486/DX-33 won't be sufficient?
>
>Anyway, I have found three deficiencies I'd like to report, and added
>one enhancement for my specific purposes as following:
>
>1. The man page of rtf_put claims that -1 is returned in the
> error case, and errno if set. Rather, rtf_put returns
> the negated error code. The man page should reflect this.
>
>2. A successful rtf_put doesn't return the number of bytes
> written, as required, but rather 0. This should be changed
> in the implementation by replacing "return count;" by
> "return written;".
>
>3. In 1.1 and before the rtf_select procedure returns "writable"
> only when the fifo is RTF_EMPTY in the SEL_OUT case. Rather,
> "writable" should be returned whenever the fifo is not
> completely full (i.e, !RTF_FULL).
>
>4. To fulfill my requirements I need the rt task to wait
> for ever different periods. I do this by making it a
> periodic task, and then calling rt_task_waitfor(RTIME).
> This procedure is my replacement for rt_task_wait().
> It waits for the given period, if not negative, for
> the one specified during rt_task_make_periodic otherwise.
> In rtl_sched.h I #define rt_task_wait() rt_task_waitfor(-1).
>
>IMHO RT-Linux should immediately become an option in the 2.2 kernel
>series. Besides making RT-Linux more publicly known this would also
>ease the coordination of changes. Are there any plans to do so, or
>alternatively to incorporate it into 2.3 in the future?
>
>I recently tried to apply 2.0.D to the Linux 2.2.5 kernel. I made
>some slight changes to the patches of Makefile and irq.c because two
>hunks didn't succeed. However, the kernel doesn't boot anymore! Has
>anybode else experienced this problem, or did I make something else
>wrong?
>
>Thanks for your patience with this rather long letter.
>
>Regards,
>Sebastian
>--
>Dipl.-Inform. Sebastian <dot> Wangnick <at eurocontrol in be>
>Office: Eurocontrol Maastricht UAC, Horsterweg 11, NL-6191RX Beek,
> Tel: +31-433661370, Fax: ~300
>Spam email is reported (charge $100) to providers and [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>--- [rtl] ---
>To unsubscribe:
>echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
>echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>----
>For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
>http://www.rtlinux.org/~rtlinux/
>
--- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/~rtlinux/
