Re: [USRP-users] the rfnoc fifos

2017-10-02 Thread Derek Kozel via USRP-users
Hi Jason, Adding FIFOs adds buffering which helps with any transient changes in throughput, such as over the 10 GigE connection. It gives the flow control more room to work with before an overflow occurs (on receive). On the transmit side the DMA FIFO usually fills that role. On Fri, Sep 29,

Re: [USRP-users] the rfnoc fifos

2017-09-29 Thread Jason Matusiak via USRP-users
OK, thanks Martin.  I guess I am still confused though (no surprise there).  You say that they're "generally useful."  In what way?  If I have a flow graph that has 3 RFNoC blocks, what is the benefit of adding a FIFO or two to it? Thanks! On 09/28/2017 03:10 PM, Martin Braun via USRP-users

Re: [USRP-users] the rfnoc fifos

2017-09-28 Thread Martin Braun via USRP-users
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 01:42:22PM -0400, Jason Matusiak via USRP-users wrote: > OK, dumb question, but I just can't come up with a good answer.  I > understand that the RFNoC FIFOs are a must if you only have one NoC block > that you want to use and are using the GNURadio host [1].  So why do

[USRP-users] the rfnoc fifos

2017-09-27 Thread Jason Matusiak via USRP-users
OK, dumb question, but I just can't come up with a good answer.  I understand that the RFNoC FIFOs are a must if you only have one NoC block that you want to use and are using the GNURadio host [1].  So why do pretty much most of the examples ALWAYS have at least one, and why would I want to