Is there a reason that your not using the BeagleBoard PWM Timer hardware?
The OMAP3 ARM chip has 4 PWM hardware timers. They can generate rock
solid PWM pulse trains via the DMTIMER interface. The BeagleBoard
C2/C3/C4 brings out 3 of these timers to the expansion connector.
Writing a RTDM driver to manipulate these timers is easy.
I needed 4 PWM timer outputs, brought to the expansion connector. So I
wrote a RTDM driver to use the three that were pinned out, and used
real time limit and overflow interrupts to to wiggle a GPIO for the
fourth PWM output.
The Linux version of this driver made the 4th servomotor growl. There is
no growl using the RTDM version. I asked a lab technician to probe the
four servo PWM signals and tell me which was software GPIO generated. He
could not tell.
The RTDM driver is open source. If you want it contact me off list and
I'll send you the source.
Before you contact me for questions about the driver though...
1) Know how to build a standard Linux driver.
2) Read the OMAP technical reference manual
(http://www.ti.com/lit/ug/spruf98t/spruf98t.pdf) sections on the Timers
(Chapter 16).
Regards,
Bob Feretich
From: Andrey Nechypurenko<[email protected]>
Subject: [Xenomai-help] PWM generation with GPIO
To: Xenomai help<[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<CAOiXNkC=kgmurfxnigoqsgchpfqdv+fyru8ogu0jmqc_dud...@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Hi Folks,
Recently I was trying to control standard servo motor with PWMs. The
system is 600MHz BeagleBoard xM (ARM) running Linux kernel version
2.6.35.9 with Xenomai version 2.5.6.
Pulses needs to be generated with 20milliseconds interval (50Hz).
Pulse width defines servo position and is typically in the range of
0.8milliseconds to 2.0milliseconds. To generate PWMs I am using GPIO
pin connected to the servo through TI's TXS0108E voltage-level
translator to translate +1.8V GPIO to required +5V. To trigger GPIO
state I am using direct memory writes (to mmapped area).
The generation loop is running in the Xenomai thread with priority 99
and looks like this:
for(;;) {
//set_data_out has offset 0x94
gpio[OFFSET(0x6094)]=0x40000000;
rt_task_sleep(up_period);
//clear_data_out has offset 0x90
gpio[OFFSET(0x6090)]=0x40000000;
rt_task_wait_period(NULL); }
where gpio array is a pointer to the memory area responsible for
controlling GPIO state. The complete code could be found here:
https://www.gitorious.org/veter/vehicle/blobs/master/src/xenopwm.c
So now the question/problem I have. If the system load is low, then
everything is fine. However, if the system load goes beyound ~60%,
servos starts shaking which is a sign of not precise PWM timing. I
have written the blog post with more details and relevant videos:
http://veter-project.blogspot.com/2011/09/real-time-enough-about-pwms-and-shaky.html
. Just scroll down to the section named "Solution 2 - predictable
timing with Xenomai" since the rest is probably obvious for the folks
hanging around here .
Running the Xenomai's latency application in parallel with our test
program reveals the latency of around 40 microseconds. Based on what I
read in Internet, 40 microseconds is considered "normal/OK" latency
for Linux/Xenomai running on ARM at 600MHz. Taking in account typical
pulse width of about 1 millisecond, 40 microseconds is about 4%. Could
it be that this 4% is in fact what causes servos to shake? If yes,
does it mean that even with Xenomai it is not possible to control
servos reliably even under moderate system load on the mentioned
hardware?
I am kind of hope that there are some tweeks could be done to make the
timing more precise and would really appreciate any hints.
Thank you,
Andrey.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
