Best regards,
Marcus
On 21.07.2015 22:27, Andy Walls wrote:
On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 12:01 -0400, discuss-gnuradio-requ...@gnu.org
wrote:
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:47:40 +0200
From: Marcus M?ller
To: discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Run graph/ scheduler ove
On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 12:01 -0400, discuss-gnuradio-requ...@gnu.org
wrote:
> Message: 11
> Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:47:40 +0200
> From: Marcus M?ller
> To: discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Run graph/ scheduler overhead
> Message-ID: <55ae1
Hi Dennis,
if I read Fig 4 of [1] correctly, then you 32-delay DC blocker has a
passband starting at let's say 0.025 * f_sample.
I've gone ahead and clicked together a FIR filter that theoretically
should perform as well; its CPU consumption is... tolerable :)
Compare [2]; taps are in the PNG c
On Mon, 2015-07-13 at 21:43 -0400, Tom Rondeau wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 12:30 AM, West, Nathan
> wrote:
> This is a lot of information, and I'm just going to pick out
> one statement to comment on.
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dennis Glatting
>
On Mon, 2015-07-13 at 00:30 -0400, West, Nathan wrote:
> This is a lot of information, and I'm just going to pick out one
> statement to comment on.
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dennis Glatting
> wrote:
>
> If I remove most of the blocks from my graph with the result:
>
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 12:30 AM, West, Nathan
wrote:
> This is a lot of information, and I'm just going to pick out one statement
> to comment on.
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dennis Glatting
> wrote:
>
>>
>> If I remove most of the blocks from my graph with the result:
>>
>> source -
On 12.07.2015 15:13, Dennis Glatting wrote:
> 3) I am compiling using -std=c++11 against g++ 4.9, the stock compiler.
> I am using some of c++11's keywords and constructs. I suspect this is
> part of the problem however removing it will require work. I remember
> reading somewhere "c++11 IS NOT sup
This is a lot of information, and I'm just going to pick out one statement
to comment on.
On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Dennis Glatting wrote:
>
> If I remove most of the blocks from my graph with the result:
>
> source --> dc block --> Preamble --> null
>
> with the statement:
>
> re
I forgot some important information. There are four things I am doing
out of normal:
1) I have a couple of data structure maintenance threads that run once a
second. They are created like this:
static std::thread builder( gr::adsb::do_build );
These threads have a std::mutex lock around thei
(Resent with pix removed.)
I am looking for pointers and papers on the overhead of the scheduler,
its performance, and high(?) data rates.
I enclosed a partial pix of my graph. The essence is:
HackRF -> DC Block -> My Preamble Detect
There are other blocks in the graph but they do very litt
10 matches
Mail list logo
