Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  <20032004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  <20032004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: Spurious link alarms generated?
From: Marty Kraimer <mrk@aps.anl.gov>
To: "J. Frederick Bartlett" <bartlett@fnal.gov>
Cc: tech-talk <tech-talk@aps.anl.gov>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 07:13:06 -0600
This should work as you suggest.

To diagnose:

In the xxx.db file set TPRO true for both A and B.
At initialization does B get processed before A?

If so then B is processed for some other reason than A linking to it
   a) PINI is TRUE
   b) SCAN is not passive
   c) Another link references B. Issue the command:
       dblsr "<B name>",2

Marty

J. Frederick Bartlett wrote:
  I have encountered a situation in which spurious (i.e. unexpected) link
alarms are being generated following the reboot of an IOC. The record
connectivity is:

Record A has a scan rate of one second

Record A has a forward link to record B

	Record B has an input link in its INP field that references record A with
"NPP"
	and "MS" specified.

When record A is processed for the first time, record B registers an
"INVALID" alarm severity with a "LINK" alarm status. The second time that A
is processed, the "INVALID" alarm severity is cleared.

  I believe that, when record B retrieves the value from record A during the
initial process cycle, the alarm severity that is propagated by the "MS"
specification is "INVALID" because record A must, somehow, retain the
original "INVALID" severity and the "UDF" status even though it has already
processed. During subsequent process cycles, record B does not generate an
"LINK" alarm status because record A no longer has "UDF" alarm status.

  This behavior is counter-intuitive. The "Application Developer's Guide"
states that the forward link is not executed until the originating record
has completed processing. If this is the case, why does an input link to
that record transfer the prior (or initial) alarm state?

Finally, we are still using release 3.13.4.

Fritz






Replies:
RE: Spurious link alarms generated? J. Frederick Bartlett
References:
Spurious link alarms generated? J. Frederick Bartlett

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Insertion Devices Control and EPICS Rok Sabjan
Next: Re: Insertion Devices Control and EPICS Juraj Krempasky
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  <20032004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Spurious link alarms generated? J. Frederick Bartlett
Next: RE: Spurious link alarms generated? J. Frederick Bartlett
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  <20032004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
ANJ, 10 Aug 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·