Thank you.  That fixed the ID issue.
Rob

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 11:58 AM Brian Padalino <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:40 AM Rob Kossler via USRP-users <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I just built an X310 RFNoC image where I included two DDCs, two DUCs, and
>> the replay block.  I have a couple of questions about the NOC block XML
>> files:
>>
>>    - I am getting a warning that the block ID for the replay block is
>>    not recognized (see console output below).  I checked the <install
>>    prefix>/share/uhd/rfnoc/blocks/ folder and I found 3 replay blocks
>>    (depending on how many channels in the block).  One of them has the 
>> correct
>>    NOC ID.  So, I don't understand why I'm getting the warning. My
>>    understanding is that as long as one of the blocks in this folder has the
>>    correct NOC ID, it should be found.  Is that incorrect?
>>
>>
> I can't answer all your questions, but I think maybe this commit answers
> your NOC ID issue:
>
>
> https://github.com/EttusResearch/fpga/commit/fcb865e7a6e006141f81551cdcba419df0bc3000
>
> There was one missing 0 so the NOC ID looks very similar but is off by 4
> bits.  Try changing that.
>
>
>>
>>    - When I built the image, I used a yml file because that was the only
>>    way I knew for obtaining 2 channel DDCs and DUCs.  However, I did not
>>    realize that I should have changed the NOC ID to have "2" as the last 
>> digit
>>    for DUC.  My question is: does it matter?  If I'm not using gnuradio, is
>>    there any issue with the XML file indicating that there is only 1 channel
>>    in the DUC when there are actually 2?  Will multi_usrp work differently
>>    than it would if this were correct?
>>    - Regarding the previous question, why do the NOC IDs for DDC and DUC
>>    differ such that "ddc.xml" is for a 2-channel implementation but has a NOC
>>    ID ending in "0", whereas "duc.xml" (also 2-channel) has a NOC ID ending 
>> in
>>    "2"?  Furthermore, "ddc_single.xml" is for a 1-channel implementation and
>>    has a NOC ID ending in "1" while "duc_single.xml" (also 1-channel) has a
>>    NOC ID ending in "0".
>>
>> From my understanding of the situation, unless you're using TwinRX cards,
> you can only use the single channel DDC.  Each block can't really get more
> than 200MHz worth of data to it, so having the 2 channels is really for 2
> real IF's which are being downconverted.  Anything that samples IQ would
> only really use one anyway, and the other path is not utilized.
>
> As for the 0, 1, 2 endings, I don't think RFNoC is smart enough to
> understand how many outputs/inputs are on things inherently.  So if you had
> a block with a generic setting the number of stages, you also need a
> different NOC ID to identify it as the one with that number of
> inputs/outputs.
>
> I hope this was helpful.  Someone from Ettus should probably still
> respond, though.
>
> Brian
>
_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com

Reply via email to