Re: sio modification

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
wn on this variance? I've attached the source for the test program for your reading enjoyment. :) Don't feel obligated to open it. --Bart /* Cow & Chicken rule! * * IRBaboon Copyright (C) Bart Kus, 2001. */ /* NOTE: * Be SURE to do a: comcontrol /dev

Re: sio modification

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 16:18, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > Yes, you'll have to poll, sorry... Ick. How hard would it be to pull off one of the following: 1) Give time_pps_fetch() the ability to become a blocking call 2) Modify the PPS API slightly, by allowing time_pps_fetch() to ret

Re: precise timing

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 14:33, Devin Butterfield wrote: > Atmel AVR microcontrollers are < $10 from distributors like Digikey (and > Digikey usually has high prices). They're very slick and VERY FAST. You can > do 12 MIPS with one of their chips. > > Of course you'd need to spend some time lea

Re: sio modification

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 13:18, you wrote: > It's in sio.c already. Sorry to bug you again, but it seems that the PPS driver for sio doesn't support PPS_CANWAIT. Am I correct in that assessment? Without blocking, I don't see any other mechanism for event-driven execution. The RFC

Re: sio modification

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 10:38, you wrote: > Your machine will not work too well if it is 40kHz. > > The PPS-API allows you to timestamp edges on DCD, if the frequency is > more reasonable, that would work for you. Find RFC27xx for more info > about PPS-API. Oh really. I was actually

Re: precise timing

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 12:47, Greg Shenaut wrote: > Well, setitimer has a maximum rate of 100 Hz, with a slop factor > sometimes much greater than 10 ms. This was the result of some > recent testing on a lightly-loaded standard 4.3 system. That's not good enough. :/ > How many step

Re: precise timing

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 12:30, Bakul Shah wrote: > Are you controlling the rotation speed of the drill or the > x,y,z position? I'd guess the latter. Don't you also need I am controlling XYZ. > guaranteed real time response (which FreeBSD won't provide > you)? I suppose if you ar

Re: precise timing

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On Sunday 30 September 2001 11:03, Bernd Walter wrote: > Controlling steppers via lpt is what I explained and showed last > tuesday on the cosmo-project meeting. > We used nanosleep() which worked fine for the demonstration and > playing. > As long as you don't have troubles with longer than reque

precise timing

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
On a totally unrelated subject to my sio.c message, I have a second problem. I've built a computer-controlled drill, that is controlled via the parallel port. This drill uses stepper motors, at 1/2 step. My driver software implements a maximum-acceleration control algorithm that ensu

sio modification

2001-09-30 Thread Bart Kus
Hello, I'm wondering about a seemingly simple sio.c modification. The problem stems from me wanting to use this dang remote control receiver, which manipulates the CD line of the serial port it plugs into. Afaik, the UART itself is capable of generating an interrupt whenever CD change