Am Wed, 6 Dec 2023 03:46:58 +0000
schrieb "Johnson, Andrew N." <anj at anl.gov>:
Hello Andrew,
Thank you very much for this in-depth explanation.
> The record's SCAN field is set to "I/O Intr", and in that case the
> dbProcess() call on line 1273 will not be made because the PP attribute
> on the VAL field only makes the record process when it has SCAN=Passive.
This (the *only* part) indeed was what I was not sure about from reading
the documentation. Thanks for the clarification.
> You already found the workaround for that in your next email,
Is this the solution one should go for in that case?
> and this is
> the answer to your later question about the documentation, when it talks
> about Passive records it does mean that the processing only happens when
> SCAN=Passive. It doesn't mention other SCAN types and they don't get
> processed by the PP mechanisms.
Maybe adding the word "only" there would make this clearer.
> Rolf Keitel's description thus applies to your later ai records, but not
> to the I/O Intr record itself. I believe there are only two ways that an
> I/O Intr record can get processed; by an interrupt from device support,
> or when something puts a value to its PROC field. The latter can happen
> by many mechanisms though, e.g. DB link, CA link, CA client, PVA client,
> dbpf etc.
This is another potential solution (I didn't try yet): My second update
path for the I/O Intr record (apart from receiving real new data from
device support) is coming in over a dfanout record (that also writes to
the other passive records). There are free output links, so it should be
possible to use one of them to write to the .PROC field (while using a
different one to update the .VAL field)?
cu
Gerrit
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
- References:
- camonitor vs caput Gerrit Kühn via Tech-talk
- Re: camonitor vs caput Johnson, Andrew N. via Tech-talk
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: Simulated limit switches on motorSim motor Torsten Bögershausen via Tech-talk
- Next:
Re: Windows 10 LNK1181 error on xml2.lib Ralph Lange via Tech-talk
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
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: camonitor vs caput Johnson, Andrew N. via Tech-talk
- Next:
Windows 10 LNK1181 error on xml2.lib Abdalla Ahmad via Tech-talk
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
<2023>
2024
|