Hi Marcus,
Thanks for your comments.What is group-delay in FPGA? I had a guess that there
was some delay between the time instance when FPGA issued Rx command and the
time instance when ADC started to sample. Does group-delay mean this?
I use time-based capture - specify a start time and specify the number of
samples to capture, uhd::stream_cmd_t
stream_cmd(uhd::stream_cmd_t::STREAM_MODE_NUM_SAMPS_AND_DONE);
stream_cmd.time_spec = time_spec
stream_cmd.num_samps = num_requested_samples
In a while loop, I keep calling rx_stream->recv() to receive samples. When the
number of samples are received, capture is done.
The samples are saved in buffer when calling recv(); after all samples are
received, they will be saved into a file and processed offline.
>From the EVM results, I don't think the whole timing is shifted between the
>two UHD versions, otherwise, the whole EVM should become worse, but we only
>see the final EVM becomes worse. It looks to me that FPGA is "releasing" ADC
>earlier than it should. If I increase num_requested_samples, that seems to
>delay its release.
Look forward to your further comments.
Many thanks,
Hongwei
On Sunday, 5 September 2021, 20:47:39 BST, Marcus D. Leech
<patchvonbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2021-09-05 11:28 a.m., zhou via USRP-users wrote:
Hi All,
I have a problem in using X310 USRP after upgrading UHD from 3.10 to 4.1.0. I
am using it to capture NR5G radio signal in UL. After analyzing the captured
signal, the quality in the last subframe is worse than the earlier subframes.
EVM = [1.014, 1.08, 1.055, 1.053, 0.954, 1.043, 1.145, 1.112, 1.162, 1.072,
1.131, 1.125, 1.038, 1.08, 1.003, 1.1, 0.972, 0.941, 1.046, 0.917, 1.01, 1.023,
1.025, 0.982, 1.101, 1.044, 1.089, 0.987, 0.923, 1.022, 1.012, 1.009, 1.021,
1.037, 0.998, 1.112, 1.112, 0.981, 0.987, 2.785]
When using UHD 3.10, I had no such problem.
If I deliberately capture one more subframe with UHD 4.1.0 but ignore it
when analyzing the signals, I will have good EVM.
Is this a bug in FPGA for UHD4.1.0 in X310?
Thanks for any input.
Hongwei
My guess is that there are just slight timing and/or group-delay
deifferences between the two FPGA releases, and your capture time is just
slightly too short
to account for that.
It is inevitable that going from a quite-old release to very much newer
(latest) release that there will be subtle things like group delay differences
between the
two FPGA implementations.
How do you decide when you are "done" capturing? How are you capturing? Do
you do your processing in real-time, or do you capture to a file then
process the file.
_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
_______________________________________________
USRP-users mailing list -- usrp-users@lists.ettus.com
To unsubscribe send an email to usrp-users-le...@lists.ettus.com
