Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > >>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
> > >
> > > I'm using the attaced rtnet_start
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> >>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
> >
> > I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't
> use
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
>
> I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't use
the provided one because I don
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> >>> Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
> >>>
> >>> I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't use
> >> the provided one because I don't want RTcfg).
> >>> Th
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
>>>
>>> I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't use
>> the provided one because I don't want RTcfg).
>>> The last command is 'tdmacfg rteth0
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
> >
> > I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't use
> the provided one because I don't want RTcfg).
> >
> > The last command is 'tdmacfg rteth0 slot 0 2300 -s 100
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
>
> I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't use the
> provided one because I don't want RTcfg).
>
> The last command is 'tdmacfg rteth0 slot 0 2300 -s 100 -l rtnet.log'
>
> If I use t
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
> >
> > Very good, but not yet perfect: the bug is still unknown and unfixed. :)
>
> Right, but as long as it is not fixed, maybe a wiki entry should be made
> to
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
>
> Very good, but not yet perfect: the bug is still unknown and unfixed. :)
Right, but as long as it is not fixed, maybe a wiki entry should be made to
point to this workaround. What do yo
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Very good news: I found the reason for this behavoir/bug now!
Very good, but not yet perfect: the bug is still unknown and unfixed. :)
>
> I'm using the attaced rtnet_start script to start the slave (can't use the
> provided one because I don't want RTcfg).
>
> The last
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> >>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> ...
> >>> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files.
> >>> This
> >>>
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
Karl Reichert wrote:
>> ...
> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files. This
>> is
what printk gives:
> [ 7605.737664] [REK debug] tdma->current_cycle_start =
1191326
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
...
>>> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files.
>>> This
is
>> what printk gives:
>>> [
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Karl Reichert wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> ...
>> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files.
>> This
>>> is
> what printk gives:
>> [ 7605.737664] [REK debug] tdma-
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > ...
> > >>> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files.
> This
> > is
> > >> what printk gives:
> > >>> [ 7605.737664] [REK debug] tdma->current_cycle_start
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> ...
> >>> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files. This
> is
> >> what printk gives:
> >>> [ 7605.737664] [REK debug] tdma->current_cycle_start =
> >> 1191326103544417349
> >>> [ 7605.
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
...
>>> I put the freeze after the sleep now, please see attached files. This is
>> what printk gives:
>>> [ 7605.737664] [REK debug] tdma->current_cycle_start =
>> 1191326103544417349
>>> [ 7605.737708] [REK debug] job->offset = 2300
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Karl Reichert wrote:
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Karl Reichert wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> What I would analyse if I were you:
> - Is the requ
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> >> Karl Reichert wrote:
> >>> Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> >> Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> >>> What I would analyse if I were you:
> >>> - Is the request frame sent in the ri
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
>> Karl Reichert wrote:
>>> Karl Reichert wrote:
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:>
>>> What I would analyse if I were you:
>>> - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the
> send
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > > > Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> > > > > > What I would analyse if I were you:
> > > > > > - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the
> > > > sender?
> >
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > > Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> > > > > What I would analyse if I were you:
> > > > > - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the
> > > sender?
> > > >
> > > > Well, now I have another
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Karl Reichert wrote:
> > > Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> > > > What I would analyse if I were you:
> > > > - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the
> > sender?
> > >
> > > Well, now I have another weird behavior. The slave sends a requ
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Karl Reichert wrote:
> > Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> > > What I would analyse if I were you:
> > > - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the
> sender?
> >
> > Well, now I have another weird behavior. The slave sends a request
> > calibration frame in cycle no
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> > What I would analyse if I were you:
> > - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the sender?
>
> Well, now I have another weird behavior. The slave sends a request
> calibration frame in cycle no 45849 and sets Reply Cycle Number to
Jan Kiszka wrote:>
> What I would analyse if I were you:
> - Is the request frame sent in the right slot according to the sender?
Well, now I have another weird behavior. The slave sends a request calibration
frame in cycle no 45849 and sets Reply Cycle Number to 97655. As I'm using a
cycle le
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Back from holidays, do here we go again ... I will give an abstract
> about what's going on here with Nadym and me and our problems here:
>
> The problem is, that aren't able to establish a RTnet connection
> between two desktop PCs. When they act as a master, they send thei
Back from holidays, do here we go again ... I will give an abstract about
what's going on here with Nadym and me and our problems here:
The problem is, that aren't able to establish a RTnet connection between two
desktop PCs. When they act as a master, they send their synchronisation frames
at
On Thu, August 16, 2007 10:38, Jan Kiszka wrote:
I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as
a slave. The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when
configuring a cycle length around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably
any cycle length lower then t
On Fri, August 17, 2007 15:24, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Ok, since we discussed that in xenomai mailinglist yesterday and
> there
> > seems to be no solution with my bios,
> There is one solution which you refused to try.
Not refused, just postponed. What I suppose is, that my r
Nadym Salem wrote:
> On Fri, August 17, 2007 14:20, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> Ok, since we discussed that in xenomai mailinglist yesterday and
there
> seems to be no solution with my bios,
There is one solution which you refused to try.
>>> Not refused, just postponed. What I sup
On Fri, August 17, 2007 14:20, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> > Ok, since we discussed that in xenomai mailinglist yesterday and
>>> there
>>> > seems to be no solution with my bios,
>>> There is one solution which you refused to try.
>> Not refused, just postponed. What I suppose is, that my rtnet probl
Nadym Salem wrote:
> On Fri, August 17, 2007 12:26, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> > Ok, since we discussed that in xenomai mailinglist yesterday and there
>> > seems to be no solution with my bios,
>> There is one solution which you refused to try.
>
> Not refused, just postponed. What I suppos
On Fri, August 17, 2007 12:26, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> > Ok, since we discussed that in xenomai mailinglist yesterday and there
> > seems to be no solution with my bios,
> There is one solution which you refused to try.
Not refused, just postponed. What I suppose is, that my rtnet problem
Nadym Salem wrote:
> Ok, since we discussed that in xenomai mailinglist yesterday and there
> seems to be no solution with my bios,
There is one solution which you refused to try.
--
Gilles Chanteperdrix.
--
On Thu, August 16, 2007 11:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as
>> a slave. The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when
>> configuring a cycle length around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably
>> any cycle length lowe
On Thu, August 16, 2007 11:43, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as
>> a slave. The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when
>> configuring a cycle length around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably
>> any cycle length lowe
Nadym Salem wrote:
> On Thu, August 16, 2007 10:38, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
> I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as
> a slave. The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when
> configuring a cycle length around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably
> an
Nadym Salem wrote:
> On Thu, August 16, 2007 10:13, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>>> I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as
>>> a slave. The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when
>>> configuring a cycle length around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably
>>> any cycle
Karl Reichert wrote:
> Hello rtnet users :)
>
> I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as
> a slave. The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when
> configuring a cycle length around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably
> any cycle length lower then that). When choo
Hello rtnet users :)
I'm using two machines here, one acts as a master, other one acts as a slave.
The slave isn't able to synchronize with master when configuring a cycle length
around 10 down to 2 ms (and most probably any cycle length lower then that).
When choosing 1 second cycle length, it
41 matches
Mail list logo
