Ian,
Thank you very much! That helps me out a lot!
-Dave
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 2:17 PM Ian Buckley <i...@ionconcepts.com> wrote:
> Dave, from what I remember the overhead will be incurred each time a
> (re)tune takes you to a different line of the IQ imbalance table…you can
> see the granularity of that from simply looking in the CSV file.
> The overhead is very minor I suspect, we are talking about updating two
> integer coefficients (phase and mag correction) in setting regs for each TX
> and RX port.
> -Ian
>
> On Jun 7, 2018, at 11:08 AM, Dave NotTelling via USRP-users <
> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
> Robin,
> Thanks for your feedback!
>
> Marcus,
> And that overhead is just on the initial tune, or for all tunes? I
> do mostly timed commands, so should I allow for a little more time before
> the deadline to send the timed command out?
>
> Thanks all!
>
> On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 1:56 PM Marcus D. Leech via USRP-users <
> usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
>> On 06/07/2018 01:04 PM, Dave NotTelling via USRP-users wrote:
>> > Is there a processing requirement impact to using the calibration CSV
>> > file? Does using the cal data have any impact on tuning time for the
>> > radio itself?
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> The calibration values are stuffed into some machinery in the FPGA when
>> tuning happens. So, there's a little extra command-channel overhead.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> USRP-users mailing list
>> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
>> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>>
> _______________________________________________
> USRP-users mailing list
> USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list
USRP-users@lists.ettus.com
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
