Hi Jeff,
I use burst mode all the time (mostly on N310 but X310 as well). I
usually prefer a `packet_length` tag instead of SOB --> EOB. As Marcus
mentioned, as soon as the first sample goes into the USRP sink, you
start transmitting and need to sustain your sample rate. To ensure that
you pr
Hi, Johannes!
Is the packet_length vs SOB/EOB more of a preference, or are there some
underlying reasons to go with packet_length? This is the first time I have
used burst mode, so I'm just learning all the details of it. I started with
packet_length, but I wasn't getting my expected results
Hi Rob,
Thanks for your assistance.
On 21/01/21 22:49, Rob Kossler wrote:
> Also, regarding building in-tree, are you opposed to building in-tree as even
> a temporary test case? It's not too difficult to do. I am not
> talking about the
> FPGA code - just the block controller HPP / CPP.
I am
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 4:49 PM Cédric Hannotier via USRP-users
wrote:
> On a side note:
> Are we forced to implement a custom controller for each RFNoC block?
> I was expecting that I could just write the verilog part
> and use the basic noc_block_base controller to manage my blocks in C++,
> us
Yes, I have done it. I'll share an example with you. Putting your IP
in-tree is also an option.
Thanks,
Wade
On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 5:01 PM Cédric Hannotier via USRP-users <
usrp-users@lists.ettus.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> On 08/01/21 18:58, Cédric Hannotier via USRP-users wrote:
> > Dear al
> On 21/01/21 22:49, Rob Kossler wrote:
> > Also, regarding building in-tree, are you opposed to building in-tree as
> > even
> > a temporary test case? It's not too difficult to do. I am not
> > talking about the
> > FPGA code - just the block controller HPP / CPP.
>
> I am not, especially as a
