On 1/9/19 8:54 AM, Shen, Guobao wrote:
> Nice work.
> I accidentally found out that now the PV tool set requires strict type matching.
> I guess it is implemented intentionally. Right?
Well, yes. For a some value of "intentional". I tend to default
to strictness in parsing without necessarily understanding all of
the consequences. This is certainly not the friendliest behavior.
> For example, with Timo's example, if I do a pvput with:
> $ pvput verylongOut 123456.78
> Old : verylongOut 123456
> Error: parseToPOD: Extraneous characters
> New : verylongOut 123456
>
> Thanks,
> Guobao
>
> On 1/9/19, 2:37 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Timo Korhonen via Core-talk" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:
>
> As commented on the tracker, I re-built and tested, now it works. Thanks
> Michael for the super fast fix!
>
> @Ernest: Michael already replied concerning testing. You can also build an
> IOC, pointing to the 7.0.2 base and the latest fix by Michael.
>
> Nothing very special is needed; I attached the makefile and st.cmd that I
> used, just for reference.
>
> Just add records something like this:
>
> record(int64in, "verylongIn")
> {
> field(DTYP,"Soft Channel")
> }
> record(int64out, "verylongOut")
> {
> field(DTYP,"Soft Channel")
> }
>
> (I added the DTYP, just to be sure. Would be the default anyway.)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Timo
>
>
> On 08/01/19 17:00, "Michael Davidsaver" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >On 1/8/19 3:08 AM, Timo Korhonen via Core-talk wrote:
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I made a quick try to use the 64-bit record types (int64in/int64out)
> >>with base 7.0.2.
> >>
> >> Trying to pvget the record, I get the following message on the IOC
> >>console:
> >>
> >> epics> 2019-01-08T11:43:50.309 an exception caught while in
> >>receiveThread at ../../src/remote/codec.cpp:1144: Unsupported DBR code
> >
> >https://github.com/search?q=%22Unsupported+DBR+code%22&type=Code
> >
> >points to QSRV.
> >
> >> And pvget times out. With caget, I can read the value but as expected,
> >>I do not get the 64-bit integer (because ca does not support it,
> >>obviously).
> >>
> >> Any ideas? Maybe I am missing some configuration, but I could not
> >>figure out from the release notes if I needed to do something extra.
> >
> >No, this is probably a regression on my part. I thought I had added
> >tests with the int64in/out record types, but apparently I have not (yet).
> >
> >> This is on Mac OSX El Capitan, 10.11.6. I can try other platforms later
> >>but at the first sight this does not appear to be a platform-specific
> >>issue.
> >>
> >> Timo
> >>
> >
>
>
>
- References:
- 64-bit records Timo Korhonen via Core-talk
- Re: 64-bit records Michael Davidsaver via Core-talk
- Re: 64-bit records Timo Korhonen via Core-talk
- Re: 64-bit records Shen, Guobao via Core-talk
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: 64-bit records Shen, Guobao via Core-talk
- Next:
Re: EPICS 3.15 and RTEMS 5 Benjamin Franksen via Core-talk
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
<2019>
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: 64-bit records Shen, Guobao via Core-talk
- Next:
Re: 64-bit records Michael Davidsaver via Core-talk
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
<2019>
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|