Zhe, To follow up on Martin's point. First, yes, please either use the Issue tracker or submit a patch/pull request via git and github.
Also, just pointing out a bug is one thing, but it's also much easier for us to test and verify if you provide us with an example file. That having been said, yes, I think your patch is correct. The current behavior does not produce the wrong answer, but it's wasting a ton of computation time. Please send a patch. Tom On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Martin Braun <martin.br...@ettus.com> wrote: > No comment on the patch, but in general, it helps us a lot if you do this > via github & pull request. > > M > > > On 24.09.2014 12:21, Zhe Feng wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> I checked the keep_m_in_n block and found a possible bug in it. In the >> work function, the code wrote: >> >> consume_each(d_n); >> return d_m; >> >> which I think it should be >> >> consume_each(blks*d_n); >> return blks*d_m. >> >> while blks=std::min(noutput_items/d_m, ninput_items[0]/d_n). >> >> Since both m and n of the block might change, which means the output to >> input rate might change. I changed the set_output_multiple(m) to >> set_relative_rate(d_n/d_m). And we made the set_relative_rate(d_n/d_m) >> be called in the set_m and set_n function to make sure the rate is >> updated on time. >> >> The patch is attached. Could you check it? >> >> Thanks! >> Best, >> Zhe >> >
_______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list Discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
