Brian,
I just tested the ad9361_adc_test application on Zedboard/FMCOMMS2 platform
and it reported 0% BER.
Since version 1.7.0 we're moving away from these tests and have added newer
tests called: data_src_qadc_test and data_sink_qdac_tests that utilize the
new split clocking ADC/DAC paradigm for AD9361 transceiver. We have
examples available for the following platforms: Zedboard/FMCOMM2/3, E310,
and ZCU104.
Aaron
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 1:10 PM Brian Padalino <bpadalino_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> I have to revisit this whole thing because I have tried many different
> configurations and I always get 30% BER, but when the TX is supplying the
> data, I get 0% BER. So something seems strange.
>
> Can someone verify that this test still works:
>
>
>
> https://gitlab.com/opencpi/opencpi/-/tree/v1.7.0/projects/assets/applications/ad9361_adc_test
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 1:27 PM Davis Hoover <dhoover_at_geontech.com> wrote:
>
> > You could copy the data_sub worker into your own project and do it that
> > way. This may bring up other project namespacing issues, e.g. you might
> > have to name the copy uniquely.
> >
> > IMO, the right suite of feature enhancements here would be:
> > * add a mechanism for restricting possible parameter values in worker
> build
> > configurations (the data_sub wouldn't have any restrictions, so its build
> > XML would be empty and would never need to be modified by anyone),
> > * assembly/container builds would automatically infer and build dependent
> > workers
> > * worker configurations would be built on-demand based on values inferred
> > from component/build/worker/assembly/pfconfig/container XML
> >
> > Re: runtime modification of delays, it is important to clarify: we have
> > ad9361_config_proxy.rcc, which is a dumb, low-level device proxy which
> has
> > a property ad9361_init which sets the delay values. If this proxy is used
> > alone, you will need to set the property values appropriately for your
> > platform. Then there are smarter, higher-level proxies, e.g.
> > fmcomms_2_3_rx.rcc, fmcomms_2_3_tx.rcc, and the newer-generation
> > dig_radio_ctrlr_fmcomms_2_3.rcc, which have the smarts inside them to
> read
> > the delays from the FPGA and assign them without the need to set any
> > property.
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Brian Padalino <bpadalino_at_gmail.com>
> > Date: Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:41 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Discuss OpenCPI] Fwd: AD9361 LVDS Interface Delays
> > To: Davis Hoover <dhoover_at_geontech.com>
> > Cc: <discuss_at_lists.opencpi.org>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:19 PM Davis Hoover <dhoover_at_geontech.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > No apology necessary. Hopefully we can clear this all up.
> > >
> > > The hardware delay values are read by software and then used to
> > > populate the initialization struct.
> > >
> > > For some new FPGA/card scenario, one has to pick a delay value to
> > > start with, and there's no way of knowing whether this value will work
> > > until you build the first bitstream and observe its timing report.
> > > After that initial "guess", totally agreed that guess and check is not
> > > ideal.
> > >
> > > There are indeed 64k theoretical configurations, but in practice, only
> > > on the order of 10-100 will ever be needed. For a new platform or a
> > > new card, it's at most 1 additional combo. Once you find the combo of
> > > values that works for you, please submit a merge request for any
> > > additions to ad9361_data_sub-build.xml.
> > >
> >
> > Is it possible to reference the ad9361_data_sub component out of tree and
> > build that component just for me, or do I need to modify OpenCPI itself?
> >
> > If not, could this be a feature enhancement where I define new build
> > configurations I need of core components without having to touch OpenCPI
> > itself?
> >
> >
> > >
> > > So one creates/selects values in ad9361_data_sub-build.xml, enforce
> > > use of those values in platform config/container XML and in the
> > > constraints file. The paradigm we chose was build-time customization
> > > instead of run-time.
> > >
> >
> > Roger that. I found this script in the ad9361_adc_test and I am
> wondering
> > if this does a runtime modification, or if it thinks it does but really
> > doesn't?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> https://gitlab.com/opencpi/opencpi/-/blob/b3ce4a1390f3c81579e1b16746a5b9ad0c199639/projects/assets/applications/ad9361_adc_test/scripts/AD9361_BIST_PRBS_delays.sh
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Brian
> >
Received on Wed Jul 29 2020 - 20:10:13 CDT