Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
I did a bit more testing on 2 different machines. The atom 330 dual
core and a asus/amd similar to what is in the K&T
This is the atom
http://pastebin.com/VMZDVrjc
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atom/Screenshot-1.png
The more powerful amd system
http://pastebin.com/aGUGPvwv
http://electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/asus/Screenshot.png
Maybe is is just simply a cpu processing power thing.. I don't really
think though that that ladder is that complicated or long.. (compared
to real world ladder programs).
sam
On 02/06/2012 11:38 PM, Chris Morley wrote:
> so on the first computer it scans at 135 useconds on a 1ms thread speed
> and you could actually set it to a .2us thread speed?
>
> on the second what is the scan time on a 1.1 ms thread speed?
>
> I'm a little confused.
> please clearly state the facts again and try to use the same unit so
> comparison is easier.
> It hurts my head to compare micoseconds to nanoseconds to kilohertz.
>
> :)
>
> Chris M
>
>> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:42:08 -0600
>> From: sa...@empirescreen.com
>> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
>>
>> Thanks for looking. (I am not that technical though..) The bit of
>> ladder I have seems to be taking longer than 1ms though. (on this
>> atom330 board)
>>
>> sam
>>
>> On 02/06/2012 06:02 PM, Chris Morley wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:02 -0600
>>>>sam sokolik wrote:
>>>>> All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when
>>>>> I was setting up the K&T. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for
>>>>> testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default or I would get
>>>>> real time delays. After some consultation on irc - it was decided that
>>>>> the ladder was the issue. I gave up and left my servo thread at 1ms.
>>>>>
>>>>> My ladder does tool chain logic, tool changing, pallet transfer and a
>>>>> few other odds and ends. It has probably over 16 sections and quite a
>>>>> few rungs. when the section display is open - the upper right hand
>>>>> corner has the scan time - it is 135us. vs the classic ladder sample
>>>>> in the sample configs (pretty much just estop logic and oiling) which
>>>>> runs in 17us.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a older atom330 board here that I am playing with. On a side
>>>>> note - here is the latency test without isolcups=1
>>>>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomnonisolcups.png
>>>>>
>>>>> with isolcups=1
>>>>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomisolcpus.png
>>>>>
>>>>> I put the classic ladder parts into the emc stepper_inch config from the
>>>>> sample configs (emc version 2.4.6) fresh install from the livecd then
>>>>> updated. I removed the base thread and stepgen functions from the
>>>>> threads.
>>>>>
>>>>> here is the config.
>>>>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/stepper/
>>>>> that has my ladder in it (just running - none of the pins are
>>>>> connected) This is ladder from sometime in the distant past - I am sure
>>>>> it isn't the latest ladder.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now - on this atom - it will not run at 1ms. It seems to run at
>>>>> .909khz. (servo period 110) The K&T is using a asus motherboard
>>>>> and amd processor. (don't remember exactly but it is quite a bit more
>>>>> powerful than the atom) The atom board will run the sample ladder logic
>>>>> down to about 5khz.
>>>>>
>>>>> So - the ladder isn't that intense - does classic ladder just take that
>>>>> much time? Is there another issue? am I making any sense? :) It seems
>>>>> to me if I made a much larger ladder - it might stop running on the K&T
>>>>> computer...
>>>>>
>>>>> sam
>>>>>
>>> from the source file module_hal.c:
>>>
>>> void HalWriteFloatOutputs(void) {
>>> int i;
>>> for( i=0;
>>> iGeneralParams.SizesInfos.nbr_phys_float_outputs; i++) {
>>> *(hal_float_outputs[i]) = ReadVar(VAR_PHYS_FLOAT_OUTPUT, i);
>>> }
>>> }
>>> // This actually does the magic of per
Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
so on the first computer it scans at 135 useconds on a 1ms thread speed
and you could actually set it to a .2us thread speed?
on the second what is the scan time on a 1.1 ms thread speed?
I'm a little confused.
please clearly state the facts again and try to use the same unit so comparison
is easier.
It hurts my head to compare micoseconds to nanoseconds to kilohertz.
:)
Chris M
> Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 21:42:08 -0600
> From: sa...@empirescreen.com
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
>
> Thanks for looking. (I am not that technical though..) The bit of
> ladder I have seems to be taking longer than 1ms though. (on this
> atom330 board)
>
> sam
>
> On 02/06/2012 06:02 PM, Chris Morley wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:02 -0600
> >> sam sokolik wrote:
> >>> All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when
> >>> I was setting up the K&T. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for
> >>> testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default or I would get
> >>> real time delays. After some consultation on irc - it was decided that
> >>> the ladder was the issue. I gave up and left my servo thread at 1ms.
> >>>
> >>> My ladder does tool chain logic, tool changing, pallet transfer and a
> >>> few other odds and ends. It has probably over 16 sections and quite a
> >>> few rungs. when the section display is open - the upper right hand
> >>> corner has the scan time - it is 135us. vs the classic ladder sample
> >>> in the sample configs (pretty much just estop logic and oiling) which
> >>> runs in 17us.
> >>>
> >>> I have a older atom330 board here that I am playing with. On a side
> >>> note - here is the latency test without isolcups=1
> >>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomnonisolcups.png
> >>>
> >>> with isolcups=1
> >>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomisolcpus.png
> >>>
> >>> I put the classic ladder parts into the emc stepper_inch config from the
> >>> sample configs (emc version 2.4.6) fresh install from the livecd then
> >>> updated. I removed the base thread and stepgen functions from the
> >>> threads.
> >>>
> >>> here is the config.
> >>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/stepper/
> >>> that has my ladder in it (just running - none of the pins are
> >>> connected) This is ladder from sometime in the distant past - I am sure
> >>> it isn't the latest ladder.
> >>>
> >>> Now - on this atom - it will not run at 1ms. It seems to run at
> >>> .909khz. (servo period 110) The K&T is using a asus motherboard
> >>> and amd processor. (don't remember exactly but it is quite a bit more
> >>> powerful than the atom) The atom board will run the sample ladder logic
> >>> down to about 5khz.
> >>>
> >>> So - the ladder isn't that intense - does classic ladder just take that
> >>> much time? Is there another issue? am I making any sense? :) It seems
> >>> to me if I made a much larger ladder - it might stop running on the K&T
> >>> computer...
> >>>
> >>> sam
> >>>
> > from the source file module_hal.c:
> >
> > void HalWriteFloatOutputs(void) {
> > int i;
> > for( i=0;
> > iGeneralParams.SizesInfos.nbr_phys_float_outputs; i++) {
> > *(hal_float_outputs[i]) = ReadVar(VAR_PHYS_FLOAT_OUTPUT, i);
> > }
> > }
> > // This actually does the magic of periodic refresh of pins and
> > // calculations. This function runs at the period rate of the thread
> > // that you added it to.
> > // period, leftover, t0,and t1 are in nanoseconds.
> > // This function first checks to see if at least 1 millisecond has gone by
> > // if the period is under 1 MS then if will not refresh rungs yet but
> > // will keep track of how many NS were left over. Does this each period
> > // till at least 1 MS has occured, if more then 1 MS then keeps track of
> > // leftover NS for accuracy. Bottom line is you can run classiclader in
> > // a thread faster than 1 millisecond but it will not refresh the rungs
> > // any faster (it can be slower though). If your refresh is too slow and
> > // your timer are using multiples of 10
Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
Thanks for looking. (I am not that technical though..) The bit of
ladder I have seems to be taking longer than 1ms though. (on this
atom330 board)
sam
On 02/06/2012 06:02 PM, Chris Morley wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:02 -0600
>> sam sokolik wrote:
>>> All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when
>>> I was setting up the K&T. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for
>>> testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default or I would get
>>> real time delays. After some consultation on irc - it was decided that
>>> the ladder was the issue. I gave up and left my servo thread at 1ms.
>>>
>>> My ladder does tool chain logic, tool changing, pallet transfer and a
>>> few other odds and ends. It has probably over 16 sections and quite a
>>> few rungs. when the section display is open - the upper right hand
>>> corner has the scan time - it is 135us. vs the classic ladder sample
>>> in the sample configs (pretty much just estop logic and oiling) which
>>> runs in 17us.
>>>
>>> I have a older atom330 board here that I am playing with. On a side
>>> note - here is the latency test without isolcups=1
>>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomnonisolcups.png
>>>
>>> with isolcups=1
>>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomisolcpus.png
>>>
>>> I put the classic ladder parts into the emc stepper_inch config from the
>>> sample configs (emc version 2.4.6) fresh install from the livecd then
>>> updated. I removed the base thread and stepgen functions from the threads.
>>>
>>> here is the config.
>>> http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/stepper/
>>> that has my ladder in it (just running - none of the pins are
>>> connected) This is ladder from sometime in the distant past - I am sure
>>> it isn't the latest ladder.
>>>
>>> Now - on this atom - it will not run at 1ms. It seems to run at
>>> .909khz. (servo period 110) The K&T is using a asus motherboard
>>> and amd processor. (don't remember exactly but it is quite a bit more
>>> powerful than the atom) The atom board will run the sample ladder logic
>>> down to about 5khz.
>>>
>>> So - the ladder isn't that intense - does classic ladder just take that
>>> much time? Is there another issue? am I making any sense? :) It seems
>>> to me if I made a much larger ladder - it might stop running on the K&T
>>> computer...
>>>
>>> sam
>>>
> from the source file module_hal.c:
>
> void HalWriteFloatOutputs(void) {
> int i;
> for( i=0; iGeneralParams.SizesInfos.nbr_phys_float_outputs;
> i++) {
> *(hal_float_outputs[i]) = ReadVar(VAR_PHYS_FLOAT_OUTPUT, i);
> }
> }
> // This actually does the magic of periodic refresh of pins and
> // calculations. This function runs at the period rate of the thread
> // that you added it to.
> // period, leftover, t0,and t1 are in nanoseconds.
> // This function first checks to see if at least 1 millisecond has gone by
> // if the period is under 1 MS then if will not refresh rungs yet but
> // will keep track of how many NS were left over. Does this each period
> // till at least 1 MS has occured, if more then 1 MS then keeps track of
> // leftover NS for accuracy. Bottom line is you can run classiclader in
> // a thread faster than 1 millisecond but it will not refresh the rungs
> // any faster (it can be slower though). If your refresh is too slow and
> // your timer are using multiples of 100 microseconds they might not be
> accurate.
> // t0 and t1 are for keeping track of how long the refresh of sections,
> // and HAL pins take (it is displayed in the 'section display' GUI (in
> microseconds).
>
> static void hal_task(void *arg, long period) {
> unsigned long t0, t1,milliseconds;
> static unsigned long leftover=0;
> leftover += period;
> milliseconds= leftover / 100;
> leftover %= 100;
>
> if (milliseconds>= 1) {
> InfosGene->GeneralParams.PeriodicRefreshMilliSecs=milliseconds;
> *hal_state = InfosGene->LadderState;
> t0 = rtapi_get_time();
> if (InfosGene->LadderState==STATE_RUN)
> {
> HalReadPhysicalInputs();
>
> HalReads32Inputs();
>
> HalReadFloatInputs();
>
> ClassicLadder_RefreshAllSections();
>
> HalWritePhysicalOutputs();
>
> HalWrites32Outputs();
>
> HalWriteFloatOutputs();
> }
>t1 = rtapi_get_time();
> InfosGene->DurationOfLastScan = t1 - t0;
> }
> }
>
> later the duration of scan (in nano seconds) is divide by 1000 to display
> micro seconds
> which fit better in the display.
>
> I believe the idea of limiting the minimum refresh to 1 millisecond is so it
> is difficult
> to set a refresh rate that is shorter then the duration rate.
>
> Maybe there is a better idea?
>
> Chris M
>
Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
>
>
>
> On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 13:05:02 -0600
> sam sokolik wrote:
> > All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when
> > I was setting up the K&T. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for
> > testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default or I would get
> > real time delays. After some consultation on irc - it was decided that
> > the ladder was the issue. I gave up and left my servo thread at 1ms.
> >
> > My ladder does tool chain logic, tool changing, pallet transfer and a
> > few other odds and ends. It has probably over 16 sections and quite a
> > few rungs. when the section display is open - the upper right hand
> > corner has the scan time - it is 135us. vs the classic ladder sample
> > in the sample configs (pretty much just estop logic and oiling) which
> > runs in 17us.
> >
> > I have a older atom330 board here that I am playing with. On a side
> > note - here is the latency test without isolcups=1
> > http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomnonisolcups.png
> >
> > with isolcups=1
> > http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomisolcpus.png
> >
> > I put the classic ladder parts into the emc stepper_inch config from the
> > sample configs (emc version 2.4.6) fresh install from the livecd then
> > updated. I removed the base thread and stepgen functions from the threads.
> >
> > here is the config.
> > http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/stepper/
> > that has my ladder in it (just running - none of the pins are
> > connected) This is ladder from sometime in the distant past - I am sure
> > it isn't the latest ladder.
> >
> > Now - on this atom - it will not run at 1ms. It seems to run at
> > .909khz. (servo period 110) The K&T is using a asus motherboard
> > and amd processor. (don't remember exactly but it is quite a bit more
> > powerful than the atom) The atom board will run the sample ladder logic
> > down to about 5khz.
> >
> > So - the ladder isn't that intense - does classic ladder just take that
> > much time? Is there another issue? am I making any sense? :) It seems
> > to me if I made a much larger ladder - it might stop running on the K&T
> > computer...
> >
> > sam
> >
from the source file module_hal.c:
void HalWriteFloatOutputs(void) {
int i;
for( i=0; iGeneralParams.SizesInfos.nbr_phys_float_outputs;
i++) {
*(hal_float_outputs[i]) = ReadVar(VAR_PHYS_FLOAT_OUTPUT, i);
}
}
// This actually does the magic of periodic refresh of pins and
// calculations. This function runs at the period rate of the thread
// that you added it to.
// period, leftover, t0,and t1 are in nanoseconds.
// This function first checks to see if at least 1 millisecond has gone by
// if the period is under 1 MS then if will not refresh rungs yet but
// will keep track of how many NS were left over. Does this each period
// till at least 1 MS has occured, if more then 1 MS then keeps track of
// leftover NS for accuracy. Bottom line is you can run classiclader in
// a thread faster than 1 millisecond but it will not refresh the rungs
// any faster (it can be slower though). If your refresh is too slow and
// your timer are using multiples of 100 microseconds they might not be
accurate.
// t0 and t1 are for keeping track of how long the refresh of sections,
// and HAL pins take (it is displayed in the 'section display' GUI (in
microseconds).
static void hal_task(void *arg, long period) {
unsigned long t0, t1,milliseconds;
static unsigned long leftover=0;
leftover += period;
milliseconds= leftover / 100;
leftover %= 100;
if (milliseconds >= 1) {
InfosGene->GeneralParams.PeriodicRefreshMilliSecs=milliseconds;
*hal_state = InfosGene->LadderState;
t0 = rtapi_get_time();
if (InfosGene->LadderState==STATE_RUN)
{
HalReadPhysicalInputs();
HalReads32Inputs();
HalReadFloatInputs();
ClassicLadder_RefreshAllSections();
HalWritePhysicalOutputs();
HalWrites32Outputs();
HalWriteFloatOutputs();
}
t1 = rtapi_get_time();
InfosGene->DurationOfLastScan = t1 - t0;
}
}
later the duration of scan (in nano seconds) is divide by 1000 to display micro
seconds
which fit better in the display.
I believe the idea of limiting the minimum refresh to 1 millisecond is so it is
difficult
to set a refresh rate that is shorter then the duration rate.
Maybe there is a better idea?
Chris M
--
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePo
Re: [Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
here is a show... 5 float OUT 0 axis.0.motor-pos-cmd ==> Xpos-cmd 5 float IN 0 axis.0.motor-pos-fb <== Xpos-fb 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.0.neg-hard-limit 5 bit IN FALSE axis.0.neg-lim-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.0.pos-hard-limit 5 bit IN FALSE axis.0.pos-lim-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.0.wheel-jog-active 5 bit OUT TRUE axis.1.active 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.amp-enable-out ==> Yen 5 bit IN FALSE axis.1.amp-fault-in 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.backlash-corr 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.backlash-filt 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.backlash-vel 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.coarse-pos-cmd 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.error 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.f-error 5 float OUT 0.01 axis.1.f-error-lim 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.f-errored 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.faulted 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.free-pos-cmd 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.free-tp-enable 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.free-vel-lim 5 bit IN FALSE axis.1.home-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.homed 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.homing 5 bit OUT TRUE axis.1.in-position 5 bit I/O FALSE axis.1.index-enable 5 s32 IN 0 axis.1.jog-counts 5 bit IN FALSE axis.1.jog-enable 5 float IN 0 axis.1.jog-scale 5 bit IN FALSE axis.1.jog-vel-mode 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.joint-pos-cmd 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.joint-pos-fb 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.joint-vel-cmd 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.kb-jog-active 5 float OUT 0 axis.1.motor-pos-cmd ==> Ypos-cmd 5 float IN 0 axis.1.motor-pos-fb <== Ypos-fb 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.neg-hard-limit 5 bit IN FALSE axis.1.neg-lim-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.pos-hard-limit 5 bit IN FALSE axis.1.pos-lim-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.1.wheel-jog-active 5 bit OUT TRUE axis.2.active 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.amp-enable-out ==> Zen 5 bit IN FALSE axis.2.amp-fault-in 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.backlash-corr 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.backlash-filt 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.backlash-vel 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.coarse-pos-cmd 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.error 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.f-error 5 float OUT 0.01 axis.2.f-error-lim 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.f-errored 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.faulted 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.free-pos-cmd 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.free-tp-enable 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.free-vel-lim 5 bit IN FALSE axis.2.home-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.homed 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.homing 5 bit OUT TRUE axis.2.in-position 5 bit I/O FALSE axis.2.index-enable 5 s32 IN 0 axis.2.jog-counts 5 bit IN FALSE axis.2.jog-enable 5 float IN 0 axis.2.jog-scale 5 bit IN FALSE axis.2.jog-vel-mode 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.joint-pos-cmd 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.joint-pos-fb 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.joint-vel-cmd 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.kb-jog-active 5 float OUT 0 axis.2.motor-pos-cmd ==> Zpos-cmd 5 float IN 0 axis.2.motor-pos-fb <== Zpos-fb 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.neg-hard-limit 5 bit IN FALSE axis.2.neg-lim-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.pos-hard-limit 5 bit IN FALSE axis.2.pos-lim-sw-in 5 bit OUT FALSE axis.2.wheel-jog-active 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.a 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.b 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.c 9 float OUT 0 axisui.jog.increment 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.u 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.v 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.w 9 bit OUT TRUE axisui.jog.x 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.y 9 bit OUT FALSE axisui.jog.z 9 bit IN FALSE axisui.notifications-clear 9 bit IN FALSE axisui.notifications-clear-error 9 bit IN FALSE axisui.notifications-clear-info 9 bit IN FALSE axisui.set-manual-mode 7 float IN 0 classicladder.0.floatin-00 7 float IN 0 classicladder.0.floatin-01 7 float IN
[Emc-users] Classic ladder questions and comments
All this talk of lowering the servo thread had me thinking back to when I was setting up the K&T. I wanted to try to lower the servo thread for testing. I could not go much slower the the 1ms default or I would get real time delays. After some consultation on irc - it was decided that the ladder was the issue. I gave up and left my servo thread at 1ms. My ladder does tool chain logic, tool changing, pallet transfer and a few other odds and ends. It has probably over 16 sections and quite a few rungs. when the section display is open - the upper right hand corner has the scan time - it is 135us. vs the classic ladder sample in the sample configs (pretty much just estop logic and oiling) which runs in 17us. I have a older atom330 board here that I am playing with. On a side note - here is the latency test without isolcups=1 http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomnonisolcups.png with isolcups=1 http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/atomisolcpus.png I put the classic ladder parts into the emc stepper_inch config from the sample configs (emc version 2.4.6) fresh install from the livecd then updated. I removed the base thread and stepgen functions from the threads. here is the config. http://www.electronicsam.com/images/KandT/testing/stepper/ that has my ladder in it (just running - none of the pins are connected) This is ladder from sometime in the distant past - I am sure it isn't the latest ladder. Now - on this atom - it will not run at 1ms. It seems to run at .909khz. (servo period 110) The K&T is using a asus motherboard and amd processor. (don't remember exactly but it is quite a bit more powerful than the atom) The atom board will run the sample ladder logic down to about 5khz. So - the ladder isn't that intense - does classic ladder just take that much time? Is there another issue? am I making any sense? :) It seems to me if I made a much larger ladder - it might stop running on the K&T computer... sam -- Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 ___ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
