Hi,
the rfnoc_image_builder has probably generated the bitfile but in a folder
which you do not expect.
Until UHD 4.7 (which you are using), the build folder is generated in the same
folder as the x410_CG_400_rfnoc_image_core.yml file (fpga/usrp3/top/x400) per
default.
Starting with UHD 4.8,
On 12/02/2025 10:22, Jose M. Nuñez Ortuño | CUD-Marín wrote:
Just to be sure. Is USRP N200 a non-RFNoC device?
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
To follow up on th
Hi All,
Is there a mechanism to set a timeout when reading or writing registers for a
OOT NOC block?
Thanks,
Marino
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
Hi Marcus,
Thank you for your quick response.
best regards
M.
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
Hi,
Thanks for the recommendations. I installed Vivado 2021.1 on my machine and ran
the rfnoc_image_builder command found in the documentation using the yaml file
x410_CG_400_rfnoc_image_core.yml. It generates a folder
build-usrp_x410_fpga_CG_400 with the following files: device_tree.dts
Make
On 12/02/2025 10:22, Jose M. Nuñez Ortuño | CUD-Marín wrote:
Just to be sure. Is USRP N200 a non-RFNoC device?
Correct. The FPGA is of a size and generation that cannot be supported
by RFNoC tooling.
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists
Just to be sure. Is USRP N200 a non-RFNoC device?
___
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
On 12/02/2025 09:49, cyberp...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
We have a OOT RFNOC project and have built the UHD framework with DPDK
installed but we don’t use DPDK. Is there any side-effect in doing so?
Would it be better to not have the DPDK libs installed at all?
Thank you,
Marino
I don't think
Hi
We have a OOT RFNOC project and have built the UHD framework with DPDK
installed but we don’t use DPDK. Is there any side-effect in doing so? Would
it be better to not have the DPDK libs installed at all?
Thank you,
Marino
___
USRP-users mailin
Thanks Martin!
From: Martin Braun
Sent: Wednesday, 12 February 2025 15:38
Cc: usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
Subject: [EXTERNAL][USRP-users] Re: N300 HG image being built instead of XG
Hi Kevin,
confirm this is a bug. You can force the correct target by specifying
rfnoc_image_builder
Hey Eugene,
if you can summarize a bug report and put it on github.com/EttusResearch/uhd,
that'll help here. Thanks!
--M
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 6:45 AM Eugene Grayver
wrote:
> Hi
> This was my mistake. Turns out the offset is handled correctly. However,
> I think there is a bug for the N310
Hi all,
a lot going on here, but let me just confirm a few things:
- The _200 suffix is derived from the max analog bandwidth you get, but
like Chris says there is no analog filtering on the X440, so really it's a
maximum sampling rate (of 250Msps). With the _200 image, you get access to
resample
Hi Kevin,
confirm this is a bug. You can force the correct target by specifying
rfnoc_image_builder -t N310_XG [...your other arguments...]
...which we confirm works. We'll have a fix for this on the way.
--M
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 9:26 AM Kevin Williams
wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> The header
Hi Everyone,
The header of my N300 yaml file is shown below, but this results in an HG
image being built, not the XG. (I am building this with UHD-4.8.)
The HG image does contain my new RFNoC block, with the right endpoints etc.,
so I believe the yaml config should be (mostly) correct?
I find it
14 matches
Mail list logo
