Has anyone tried running the latency test on the Intel H61, H77, or Z77
design motherboards using a CPU with the integrated HD graphics?
A number of companies make them and they all seem to be socket 1155 boards.
The boards cost $50-$130 each and a 35 watt CPU runs about $80.
Thanks, Dave
-
I was testing the latency of this computer and I thought that it was doing
pretty good, but over night there were some pretty significant latency spikes.
I was afraid this was going to happen, it is an HP-Compaq dc5750 and the bios
has virtually zero user settable power settings (the only thing
I bougt this.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/200542103383?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649
running the latest version of linuxcnc.
Hypertreading off in bios,
ISOLCPU is done.
when runnnig latencytest and 3 x glxgears + some video i can run for 30
min and get:
servo thread (1.0ms) max
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013, Dave wrote:
> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 19:36:47 -0500
> From: Dave
> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Emc-users] Latency
>
> Has anyone tried running the latency test on t
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Dave wrote:
> Has anyone tried running the latency test on the Intel H61, H77, or Z77
> design motherboards using a CPU with the integrated HD graphics?
>
Intel DH61AG + i3 2120T 2.6 GHz LGA1155
http://www.anderswallin.net/2012/12/latency-histogram/
It would be
Unless I am reading that incorrectly, that appears to be fine for a 1 ms
servo thread, but would not work well for direct stepper control.
The D525MW boards are really nice. I have used a lot of them over the
last year plus and I have a bit of stockpile built up right now, but the
Intel 525 C
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Dave wrote:
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:01:45 -0500
> From: Dave
> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>
> To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency
>
> Unless I am reading that inc
> > To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" >
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency
> >
> > Unless I am reading that incorrectly, that appears to be fine for a 1 ms
> > servo thread, but would not work well for direct stepper control.
> >
> > The D52
I missed that board and the other integrated Celeron boards.Thanks
for pointing those out.
Let us know what you find. That Gigabyte board has a lot to like.
What AMD MITX boards are known to work well?
Dave
> I think I'll order this one to try out today:
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013, Dave wrote:
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 13:52:28 -0500
> From: Dave
> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency
>
>
> I missed that board and the other
When I run the latency test, I get Base thread jitter of 932659. In the
config file the max. is set at 50,000.
When I load EMC2 I get a message "Unexpected real time delay: check dmesg
for details' as well " RTAPI: ERROR:Unexpected realtime delay on task 1.
This message will only display once per
Hello all,
I'm new to this group and also to EMC.
I have just succesfully installed Ubuntu 6.0.6 and EMC and updated it to 2.2
without problems.
When I tried to configure EMC however, I was confronted to the latency issue
(close to 100 uS) mentioned in the docuentation, related to MSI boards.
I want to do the latency test. What does 'open a shell' mean? John
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great p
Hello everyone
I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
I decided to do the Latency Test first, having read both sets of
instructions. 'Configuration Wizard for Steeper Machines' & 'EMC2 Getting
Started' both have identical instructions regarding the Latency Test.
Quote "To run the test, from Appl
I guess the end question is, is this machine going to be able to run a stepper
driven lathe?
>From the latency test window, servo thread was 218376, and base thread was
88463, this after firing up FF and hitting a couple of sites, m oving FF
around, and running glxgears.
Machine is an old HP w
dave@linuxcnc:~$ uname -a
Linux linuxcnc 3.4-9-rtai-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT Debian 3.4.55-4linuxcnc
i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
task: 103857488 cycles, min=0.49, max=0.474214, avg=0.010993, 86
latency excursions (> 10x expected cycle time of 0.01s)
task: 25439189 cycles, min=0.49, ma
I need know how to calculate latency in EMC2's latency-test.
could anyone tell me the latency test's algorithm?
--
ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate
GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to
Am 20.03.2013 um 08:48 schrieb Bjørn:
> I bougt this.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/200542103383?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649
> running the latest version of linuxcnc.
specifically which version?
I have a D525MW and get much better results
>
> Hypertreading off in bios,
> I
Am 20.03.2013 um 08:48 schrieb Bj?rn:
> I bougt this.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/200542103383?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649
> running the latest version of linuxcnc.
specifically which version?
I have a D525MW and get much better results
> Hypertreading off in bios,
> ISOLCP
>>
>> Regards Bjorn
>>
> I am running 10.04 LTS and LinuxCNC 2.5.2
>
> when you say, boot the kernel with the option 'idle=poll' is this done
> the same way as isolcpu?
yes
try both 'idle=poll' and 'nohlt'
see section 4 of http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?XenomaiKernelPackages
this
Am 20.03.2013 um 08:48 schrieb Bj?rn:
> I bougt this.
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/200542103383?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649
> running the latest version of linuxcnc.
specifically which version?
I have a D525MW and get much better results
> Hypertreading off in bios,
> ISOLCP
On 3/25/2013 9:56 AM, Bjørn wrote:
> now i have tested: boot with isolcpu(big
> improvement in general latency but still spikes)
>turn of smi, (improvement in general latency but still spikes)
> 'idle=poll' and 'nohlt'(little or no effect)
>
> acpi = off and api=off (little or no effect)
>
>
Message: 1 Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 15:25:31 -0400 From: "Kent A. Reed"
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency problem To:
"Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
Message-ID: <5150a4ab.6050...@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 3/25
On 3/28/2013 5:23 AM, bjørn wrote:
> that I bought the power supply together with the D525MW board. here are a
> link -
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/160721043666?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649
> it says 60w but i don't know the quality of it. I will test another one
> when i get
snip
/"I keep mulling over this "5-6 hours" observation. I know we recommend
running the latency test for a long time but I don't think we understand
why these spiking events show up rarely. It's all well and good to blame
power saving features in modern CPUs but they are functioning over much
On Mar 28, 2013 2:58 PM, "bjørn" wrote:
>
> snip
> /"I keep mulling over this "5-6 hours" observation. I know we recommend
> running the latency test for a long time but I don't think we understand
> why these spiking events show up rarely. It's all well and good to blame
> power saving features i
You won't have any issues with the D525MW and an SSD on that Pico power
supply. I have used several and never had a failure yet.
Some have 3+ years on them now..running 24x7.
Dave
On 3/28/2013 2:53 PM, bjørn wrote:
> snip
> /"I keep mulling over this "5-6 hours" observation. I know we recomme
Dave wrote:
> You won't have any issues with the D525MW and an SSD on that Pico power
> supply. I have used several and never had a failure yet.
>
> Some have 3+ years on them now..running 24x7.
>
Yes, the D525MW is supposed to have a normal power draw of 13 W,
while a worst-case maximum test
My CNC computer was purchased several years ago from Sherline with CNC
installed.
I have two disk drives. One has linuxcnc-2.7.14-wheezy.iso and the
other has linuxcnc-stretch-uspace-amd64.iso.
On both OS's, I see 'unexpected latency warning messages', infrequent on
'wheezy' and 99% of the
2012/3/31 Alwyn McLeod :
> When I run the latency test, I get Base thread jitter of 932659. In the
> config file the max. is set at 50,000.
What You set in INI file is the length of the particular thread. I
guess that length of base thread is set at 50'000 ns and length of
servo thread is 1'000'00
The simple explanation is that is a lot of jitter. Look here to debug -
http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?TroubleShooting
I had a graphics card that ran at 200,000 when using the manufacturer 3d
driver, but down to 40,000 with software 3d.
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:40 AM, Viesturs Lācis w
On Sat, 2012-03-31 at 08:00 +0200, Alwyn McLeod wrote:
> When I run the latency test, I get Base thread jitter of 932659. In the
> config file the max. is set at 50,000.
>
> When I load EMC2 I get a message "Unexpected real time delay: check dmesg
> for details' as well " RTAPI: ERROR:Unexpected r
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:00 AM, Alwyn McLeod wrote:
> When I run the latency test, I get Base thread jitter of 932659. In the
> config file the max. is set at 50,000.
>
>
> Being a novice as far as Ubuntu is concerned, I am at a loss as to how I
> can resolve these issues. Any assistance will be
On Saturday, March 31, 2012 01:32:39 PM Kirk Wallace did opine:
> On Sat, 2012-03-31 at 08:00 +0200, Alwyn McLeod wrote:
> > When I run the latency test, I get Base thread jitter of 932659. In
> > the config file the max. is set at 50,000.
> >
> > When I load EMC2 I get a message "Unexpected real
On Linux, modifying system files requires the use of administrator
("root") privileges. I would do an activity like this in the terminal
window with "sudo":
sudo cp rtai_smp.ko /usr/realtime-2.6.15-magma/modules/rtai_smi.ko
(assuming you have already changed to the directory where you compiled
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm new to this group and also to EMC.
>
> I have just succesfully installed Ubuntu 6.0.6 and EMC and updated it to
> 2.2 without problems.
>
> When I tried to configure EMC however, I was confronted to the latency
> issue (close to 100 uS) mentioned i
Applications/System Tools/Terminal ought to get you there.
The shell is where you issue commands in text mode. (Real Linux ;^)
To prevent mistakes, I usually copy what's needed and paste it into
the terminal window (Edit/Paste or right-click, paste)).
One line at a time. Hit after each pasted line
Dave Houghton wrote:
>Hello everyone
>
>I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
>
>I decided to do the Latency Test first, having read both sets of
>instructions. 'Configuration Wizard for Steeper Machines' & 'EMC2 Getting
>Started' both have identical instructions regarding the Latency Test.
>
>Qu
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
> Dave Houghton wrote:
>
>
>> Hello everyone
>>
>> I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
>>
>> I decided to do the Latency Test first, having read both sets of
>> instructions. 'Configuration Wizard for Steeper Machines' & 'EMC2 Getting
>> Started' both have identica
On Oct 30, 2008, at 8:41 AM, tomp wrote:
> Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
>> Dave Houghton wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hello everyone
>>>
>>> I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
>>>
>>> I decided to do the Latency Test first, having read both sets of
>>> instructions. 'Configuration Wizard for Steeper Machi
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Wille Padnos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 October 2008 05:13 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Test
Dave Houghton wrote:
>Hello everyone
>
>I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
>I
> Thanks for the "super quick" response.
> OK I understand, now how do I get rid of:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~
> It (terminal) will not allow me to 'Backspace' or 'delete'
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~
> I think I'm really missing something here.
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~" is your command line prompt. You don'
Dave Houghton wrote:
> In general, you're supposed to type only what's after the $ (or #, if
> you're supposed to do things as root). Everything before the $ is the
> prompt printed by the terminal program. So you should be typing only
> "latency-test" (without the quotes).
What are numbers ar
Dave Engvall wrote:
> On Oct 30, 2008, at 8:41 AM, tomp wrote:
>
>
>> Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
>>
>>> Dave Houghton wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
Hello everyone
I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
I decided to do the Latency Test first, having read both sets of
>>
Dave Houghton wrote:
> Hello everyone
>
> I didn't get far trying to set up EMC2
>
> I decided to do the Latency Test first, having read both sets of
> instructions. 'Configuration Wizard for Steeper Machines' & 'EMC2 Getting
> Started' both have identical instructions regarding the Latency Test.
>
-Original Message-
From: John Kasunich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 October 2008 06:24 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Test
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~" is your command line prompt. You don't want to
get rid of it. That i
-Original Message-
From: Jon Elson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 October 2008 06:42 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Test
Jon wrote>
You may have to type the command like this :
./latency-test
depending on how you downloaded
-Original Message-
From: Wayne Parks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 30 October 2008 06:25 PM
To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Test
Dave Houghton wrote:
> In general, you're supposed to type only what's after the $ (or #, if
> yo
Dave Houghton wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Wayne Parks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 30 October 2008 06:25 PM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Test
>
> Dave Houghton wrote:
>
>> In general, you're
Dave Houghton wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wayne Parks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 30 October 2008 06:25 PM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Test
>
> Dave Houghton wrote:
>> In general, you're
At 12:44 PM 10/30/2008, you wrote:
> >
> > Now it says I should "abuse" the computer to find the worst case.
> >
> > But do not run EMC2 or Stepconf.
> >
> > Right now I have two questions.
> > 1. Why would I what to do any thing to make it worst?
> > 2. Why can I not run EMC2 and/or Stepconf.
> >
> ___
> Emc-users mailing list
> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>
>
the wiki page 'latency-test' says
Let the test run for at least 15 minutes while you run glxgears or a
similar application t
Jon wrote
Because the latency test is a realtime application, and so is EMC2. You
can't run two realtime apps a the same time.
Regards.
John Kasunich
Hi John
Thanks John. So these computer's are not as good as they think they are!
Regards
Dave
---
Andre' wrote
They are assuming that while the machine is running a part you could be
designing the next part in a CAD program, while playing some background
music, and downloading a full length movie.
I always assumed the latency test, EMC and Stepconf all use the same parts
of the real time
Dave Houghton wrote:
>> ___
>> Emc-users mailing list
>> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
>>
>>
>>
> the wiki page 'latency-test' says
> Let the test run for at least 15 minutes while you r
Tomp wrote
dave,
yes, my test was running those programs
but just idle, i was gone for a week
and while idle it went 'over the top'
> 32K
so (imo) it doesnt matter much that you would never use those apps
i wasnt there to touch a key/open a file/drag a screen for a week
it was the 'system' t
Dave Houghton wrote:
>Tomp wrote
>
>dave,
>yes, my test was running those programs
>but just idle, i was gone for a week
>and while idle it went 'over the top'
> > 32K
>so (imo) it doesnt matter much that you would never use those apps
>i wasnt there to touch a key/open a file/drag a screen for
Dave Houghton wrote:
> Tomp wrote
>
> dave,
> yes, my test was running those programs
> but just idle, i was gone for a week
> and while idle it went 'over the top'
> > 32K
> so (imo) it doesnt matter much that you would never use those apps
> i wasnt there to touch a key/open a file/drag a sc
Tomp wrote.
Dave
sorry if it sounds fatalistic
i had tried every trick known before this test, and began with a system
that seemed a good bet
i ran no cnc at same time
the results on the wiki are my best 1 day run, i think they are marginal
for stepper system
the result on same box after that w
Dave Engvall wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
> Interesting idea to run for a long time. My numbers get bad enough
> even in a short time.
> I've installed the patched .ko for Ubuntu 6.06 smi and that improved
> things greatly.
> However, I'm still getting realtime messages. Can someone point me to
> a chec
Dave Houghton wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~
> It (terminal) will not allow me to 'Backspace' or 'delete'
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~
> I think I'm really missing something here.
>
Mostly you can't. (Actually you can, if you really want to, but it is a
little complicated.)
That string is your "prompt
On Oct 30, 2008, at 7:51 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> Dave Engvall wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>> Interesting idea to run for a long time. My numbers get bad enough
>> even in a short time.
>> I've installed the patched .ko for Ubuntu 6.06 smi and that improved
>> things greatly.
>> However, I'm still getting
Dave Houghton wrote:
> Jon wrote
>
> Because the latency test is a realtime application, and so is EMC2. You
> can't run two realtime apps a the same time.
>
> Regards.
>
> John Kasunich
>
>
> Hi John
>
> Thanks John. So these computer's are not as good as they think they are!
>
You CAN, actua
Dave Engvall wrote:
ay have to try something else. Will check for a menu.
>
> After the comments (JMK) this afternoon about problems with the Mazak
> at Galesburg I
> tried running a program on my machine while doing other things.
> The program was a pretty generic mill a bunch of identical bl
On Oct 30, 2008, at 9:06 PM, John Kasunich wrote:
> Dave Engvall wrote:
>
> ay have to try something else. Will check for a menu.
>>
>> After the comments (JMK) this afternoon about problems with the Mazak
>> at Galesburg I
>> tried running a program on my machine while doing other things.
>> Th
Dave Engvall wrote:
> On Oct 30, 2008, at 9:06 PM, John Kasunich wrote:
>
>
>> Dave Engvall wrote:
>>
>> ay have to try something else. Will check for a menu.
>>
>>> After the comments (JMK) this afternoon about problems with the Mazak
>>> at Galesburg I
>>> tried running a program on my m
Dave Engvall wrote:
> Hi Jon,
> I'm using an GeForce 2 Nvidia card and it smears a bit on some windows.
> May have to try something else. Will check for a menu.
>
>
Non-manufacturer video cables are APPALLING crap! Just 5 wires in one
overall shield. I end up making my own video extension ca
tomp wrote:
>
> yes, thanks John,
> i never read an acceptable magnitude for latency in a servo system
>
>
Well, assuming you are running the servo thread at 1 KHz (1 ms interval)
and the servo code itself takes, say, 100 us on the average, then you
have a 9:1 margin. So, a sudden interruptio
Hi you all,
Gene inspired me to try EMC on my holy desktop writing computer (will never
get in touch with the dirty workshop!). It is a AMC Athlon XP 2600. I can't
do anything to bring the latency test higher than 4288 and 5020 for servo
and base, resp.
I have tried 4 of my computers so far and
Hi Peter
Thanks for the test and report. I tend to favor any but Intel. I've
had fairly good results with C3, C7, and almost any AMD. The point we
should take from your test is to try it.
There is a "used" computer store that I occasionally visit looking for
bargain boxes. I carry a Live C
For me this or something similar i happening one of my computers at every
startup. I think it is running smootly in between now but this have not always
been the case, I removed a graphics card a while ago and might have changed
things or simply a newer kernel.
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 08:48:19 -07
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017, dave wrote:
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 08:48:19 -0700
From: dave
Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
Subject: [Emc-users] latency excursions
dave@linuxcnc:~$ uname -a
Linux linuxcnc 3.4-9-rtai-68
On Sunday 23 July 2017 11:48:19 dave wrote:
> dave@linuxcnc:~$ uname -a
> Linux linuxcnc 3.4-9-rtai-686-pae #1 SMP PREEMPT Debian
> 3.4.55-4linuxcnc i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
>
> task: 103857488 cycles, min=0.49, max=0.474214, avg=0.010993, 86
> latency excursions (> 10x expected cycle time of
On 07/23/2017 10:14 AM, Peter C. Wallace wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017, dave wrote:
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 08:48:19 -0700
From: dave
Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
Subject: [Emc-users] latency excursions
dave@
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017, dave wrote:
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:37:09 -0700
From: dave
Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] latency excursions
On 07/23/2017 10:14 AM, Peter C. Wallace wrote:
Hello...
I know that laptop's are not great for EMC, but I have few of them lying
around and wish to use it.
HP NX9005 work's now for longer time without some troubles. It has some
strange thing. The layency in 1'st few minutes (up to 5) is high(in
range 1ms). I don't know why but after that the
calculate? it is measuring your computer
and you can always read the source
Dave Caroline
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 10:06 AM, ferdi andika wrote:
> I need know how to calculate latency in EMC2's latency-test.
>
> could anyone tell me the latency test's algorithm?
>
The latency-test runs the following realtime component:
http://git.linuxcnc.org/gitweb?p=emc2.git;a=blob;f=src/hal/components/timedelta.comp
Each time a realtime thread runs, the time interval del=(now-last) is computed.
The minimum and maximum del ever seen are computed in min_ and max_.
The jitt
le.com]
> Sent: December-15-19 9:46 PM
> To: 'Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)'
> Subject: [Emc-users] Latency Warning Messages
>
> My CNC computer was purchased several years ago from Sherline with CNC
> installed.
>
> I have two disk drives. One has linuxcnc-2.7.14
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 at 05:47, Thomas D. Dean wrote:
> Looks like the on-board video adapter shares main memory with the CPU.
> Linuxcnc system requirements says this is a no=no.
That advice might be outdated, I have many systems that seem perfectly
happy with this.
> Question: Will installing
> I bought 3 different low profile video cards to try and get rid of that
> latency message. The ultimate and best solution was to buy the MESA 7i92H.
> Does away with the parallel port completely.
> John Dammeyer
The parrallel port cause latency messages?
___
ecember-16-19 9:38 AM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Warning Messages
>
> > I bought 3 different low profile video cards to try and get rid of that
> > latency
> message. The ultimate and best solution was to buy the MESA 7i92
On Monday 16 December 2019 12:38:18 N wrote:
> > I bought 3 different low profile video cards to try and get rid of
> > that latency message. The ultimate and best solution was to buy the
> > MESA 7i92H. Does away with the parallel port completely. John
> > Dammeyer
>
> The parrallel port cause
> the moment. I'll switch to the MESA once the testing and development is done.
>
> John
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: N [mailto:nicklas.karlsso...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: December-16-19 9:38 AM
>> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
>>
> -Original Message-
> From: bari [mailto:bari00...@gmail.com]
> Sent: December-16-19 10:51 AM
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Warning Messages
>
> It depends on how you configure and run Linuxcnc with your intended
> ha
On Monday 16 December 2019 18:40:35 John Dammeyer wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: bari [mailto:bari00...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: December-16-19 10:51 AM
> > To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Warning Messages
> >
> > For example. The board in the machine at the moment generates a Servo
> > Jitter of 33217 and Base Jitter of 131983.
> Thats pretty slow john, I'd take that machine to the office and bring out
> the office machine. It might just be faster. :)
>
Yes Gene,
I sometimes wonder if there is
On 12/16/19 5:40 PM, John Dammeyer wrote:
>
> For example. The board in the machine at the moment generates a Servo Jitter
> of 33217 and Base Jitter of 131983.
> For the MESA and PP configuration I have:
> BASE_PERIOD = 24000
> SERVO_PERIOD = 100
>
> If I understood the document link abov
On Monday 16 December 2019 21:17:40 John Dammeyer wrote:
> > > For example. The board in the machine at the moment generates a
> > > Servo Jitter of 33217 and Base Jitter of 131983.
> >
> > Thats pretty slow john, I'd take that machine to the office and
> > bring out the office machine. It might
On 12/16/19 9:02 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> intel cpus are better than equ dated amd's, my old quad core phenom was
> phenominally bad at latency-test. 100+ microseconds. New 9th gen 6 core
> i5, 4 or 5 microseconds. Till kmail beeps the chassis speaker, then its
> 200 u-secs.
BIOS issues likely
On Monday 16 December 2019 23:12:20 bari wrote:
> On 12/16/19 9:02 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > intel cpus are better than equ dated amd's, my old quad core phenom
> > was phenominally bad at latency-test. 100+ microseconds. New 9th gen
> > 6 core i5, 4 or 5 microseconds. Till kmail beeps the chass
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 at 23:42, John Dammeyer wrote:
> For example. The board in the machine at the moment generates a Servo Jitter
> of 33217 and Base Jitter of 131983.
That's fairly terrible.
Out of interest, how well does that machine work with Mach3?
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicycle with
On Tue, 17 Dec 2019, andy pugh wrote:
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 11:32:22 +
From: andy pugh
Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Warning Messages
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 at 23:42, John D
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 9:22 AM Peter C. Wallace wrote:
>
> You can get really bad base jitter if you try to run the base thread faster
> than
> the machine is capable of responding (the latency-tests default 40 KHz base
> thread is too fast for some systems so you might get considerably better
>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 at 17:47, Dave Matthews wrote:
> For those of us in the cheap seats how does the base thread frequency
> relate to the maximum number of words per second sent to the parallel
> port?
The system can send a maximum of one pulse per base period.
--
atp
"A motorcycle is a bicyc
In the past, I have had a reasonable amount of luck reducing real time
delays by building a custom kernel. Not sure if those kinds of gains are
still possible. And it's a lot of work unless you are using realtime
preempt.
As far as Gene's problem with the beep, they are probably using the 8051 o
On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:55 PM andy pugh wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 at 17:47, Dave Matthews wrote:
>
> > For those of us in the cheap seats how does the base thread frequency
> > relate to the maximum number of words per second sent to the parallel
> > port?
>
> The system can send a maximu
> From: andy pugh [mailto:bodge...@gmail.com]
> On Mon, 16 Dec 2019 at 23:42, John Dammeyer
> wrote:
>
> > For example. The board in the machine at the moment generates a Servo
> Jitter of 33217 and Base Jitter of 131983.
>
> That's fairly terrible.
>
> Out of interest, how well does that mach
.
John Dammeyer
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Matthews [mailto:n36...@gmail.com]
> Sent: December-17-19 10:41 AM
> To: Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Latency Warning Messages
>
> On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 12:55 PM andy pugh wrote:
> &
On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 at 19:00, John Dammeyer wrote:
>
> Actually I think it's at one pulse per two base periods. One to set the step
> signals high, one to set them low.
The parport driver offers a "reset" function that sets selected pins
back to zero. You can run this later in the thread than t
1 - 100 of 163 matches
Mail list logo
