 | | RE: LNP Repost
|
|
Very true, but lets try hard not to add any more bytes to the header. The smaller the better since the packets are probably pretty small. -Jake -----Original Message----- From: Ben Laurie [mailto:ben@algroup.co.uk] Sent: Saturday, April 17, 1999 (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | RE: LNP Repost
|
|
Those are some really good points, but I am still concerned about the complexity and overhead of implementing IPC on the lego. Since resources are so limited it might just be easier to use shared memory and semaphores to communicate. On the other (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Linux Newbie
|
|
Here is a silly question, but you guys are the right ones to answer it... compliment I think :) I need to find a "What the hell is Linux" webpage. I _think_ it is a OS that is user developed, and is common on UNIX systems. I run windows 98 and (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost
|
|
(...) For IPC, each (unshared) connection would take 2 ports (src/dest), so 4 bits at least lets us have 7 IPCs (assuming port 0 is reserved as it is in Berkeley sockets, 8 if it is not). I could certainly see having need of more than 3 IPC (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Rotation sensor bug found (maybe!)
|
|
(...) You've got a point here. What if we hardwire STATE_0_VALUE to the following? #define STATE_0_VALUE (ds_unscale(1023U)-RANGE_SIZE) Or, for a more general approach: #define MIN(a,b) (a<b?a:b) #define MAX(a,b) (a>b?a:b) #define STATE_VALUE(k) ( \ (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Rotation sensor bug found (maybe!)
|
|
I think I might have found a bug in the ds_rotation_handler (direct-sensor.c). The problem arises when the STATE_0_VALUE is checked using the IN_RANGE macro. As STATE_0_VALUE is 1023U<<6, which is about the max value for an unsigned, adding to it (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost
|
|
(...) Actually, no. On attempt 16, you reserve some more bits further down for the new version number :-) Cheers, Ben. -- (URL) grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost
|
|
(...) I'd prefer 11111b for broadcast, in keeping with TCP/IP. Cheers, Ben. -- (URL) grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost
|
|
I personally can't see needing more than about 7 tasks listening at one time anyway. Keep in mind that the resources on the lego are very very small. As far as reserving an address for IPC that would be fine. We could reserve 00000b for IPC and (...) (25 years ago, 17-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost
|
|
(...) I can see this. but it is starting to feel a little cramped on the ports, though. What functionality is port 0 reserved for? Actually, I was thinking of reserving a host address (such as 0x0) for IPC. I'd probably want to have more than 3 (...) (25 years ago, 16-Apr-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
