Re: [USRP-users] USRP2 FPGA firmware version in uhd-images vs. github repository

Hey, I scanned through all uhd-images packages on files.ettus.com and noticed that usrp2_fpga.bin hasn't changed since uhd-images_003.006.000 (2013-11-19), so it is impossible for it to contain these changes: - 2015-04-09: Increase N2x0 command FIFO depth to 64.

Re: [USRP-users] spectrum analyzer USRP N210

Ok, this makes things clearer :-). Is there any difference in the obtained spectra between the stock and my compilation of FPGA firmware for the whole original range of frequencies (i.e. like in the initial screenshots, 400 - 1000 MHz) without the "80% sewing"? 2017-11-16 12:48 GMT+01:00 Ivan Zah

Re: [USRP-users] spectrum analyzer USRP N210

> > I mixed the files Context: I sent Ivan my FPGA and FW compilation. My FW didn't work, so I recommended "mixing" the images - taking my FPGA and stock FW. the carriers as they were and remained Do I see correctly that previously you had spikes at DC (-60..-58 dBm) _and_ at some other freque

Re: [USRP-users] spectrum analyzer USRP N210

Hi Ivan, these spikes look similar to what I am experiencing with my USRP2+WBX and what seems to be already fixed in the GitHub repository: https://github.com/EttusResearch/fpga/pull/4 I have asked about that just yesterday: http://lists.ettus.com/pipermail/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com/2017-Novem

[USRP-users] USRP2 FPGA firmware version in uhd-images vs. github repository

Hi, It seems that my USRP2 with uhd-images_003.010.002.000 firmware has the same incorrect behavior (spikes on the frequency spectrum) as described in the pull request: https://github.com/EttusResearch/fpga/pull/4 Do the uhd-images_003.010.002.000 package contain the firmware compiled with this

Re: [USRP-users] FPGA source code license

ol for that: > > > > https://help.github.com/articles/adding-a-license-to-a-repository/ > > > > Thanks, > > Michał > > > > 2017-11-09 15:36 GMT+01:00 Manuel Uhm : > > Hi Michal. > > UHD and RFNoC and both covered under GPLv3. We look forward to seei

Re: [USRP-users] FPGA source code license

el Uhm : > >> Hi Michal. >> >> UHD and RFNoC and both covered under GPLv3. We look forward to seeing >> your fix! >> >> Cheers, >> >> Manuel >> >> >> >> From: Michał Wróbel via USRP-users >> Sent: Thursday, November 9,

Re: [USRP-users] FPGA source code license

oC and both covered under GPLv3. We look forward to seeing your > fix! > > Cheers, > > Manuel > > > > From: Michał Wróbel via USRP-users > Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2:29 AM > Subject: [USRP-users] FPGA source code license > To: USRP-users > > > I w

[USRP-users] FPGA source code license

I want to contribute a fix to https://github.com/EttusResearch/fpga repository. However, given my agreement with the company I work for, the process of submitting the patch might be different depending on the license of the project I want to contribute to. My assumption would be that the license is

Re: [USRP-users] USRP2 schematic vs. FPGA source discrepancy

gt; > On Nov 5, 2017, at 5:44 AM, Michał Wróbel via USRP-users < > usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote: > > Hi Robin, > > Thank you for the information. > > I experimented a bit and it turned out that the V15 pin is indeed > connected to SW1, so the schematic was more in

Re: [USRP-users] Fwd: USRP2 schematic vs. FPGA source discrepancy

might consider the USRP N200 or N210. > > -Robin > > > > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Michał Wróbel via USRP-users < > usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote: > >> Dear usrp-users, >> >> Maybe you've got the answer to my question below. >> &

[USRP-users] Fwd: USRP2 schematic vs. FPGA source discrepancy

Dear usrp-users, Maybe you've got the answer to my question below. Thanks, Michał -- Forwarded message -- From: Michał Wróbel Date: 2017-10-28 19:32 GMT+02:00 Subject: USRP2 schematic vs. FPGA source discrepancy To: supp...@ettus.com Dear Ettus Research support team, I am con