00:00:14 until the enumerator releases it 00:00:18 sure ... 00:00:49 question - how does linux handle directories... same problem... someone may delete or add a file while in another shell they're ls'ing the same directory 00:00:58 what other languages do is have each 'thing' hold a referecne counter 00:01:14 seems nifty... I have recently worked some with tcl, which converts everything to strings, and unfortunately that's left a bad taste in my mouth for strings... but... I'll try to get over that ;) 00:01:36 zwisk - the only strings are object names 00:01:55 like stepgen.0.step 00:02:04 we want human readable names for those things anyway 00:02:06 so, thing A is created and a referecne is held in a list, thing A knows that one thing holds a reference to it 00:02:43 when the array deletes that ref, it shoudl inform A that its no longer holding a reference 00:02:55 when A's reference counter hits zero, it deletes itself 00:03:11 ewwww 00:03:25 otherwise, you could be about to do someting to A, and soemthing else could delete it 00:03:59 many languages work this way internally 00:04:05 my plan is that you say "do foo to A" 00:04:21 the code will get a mutex, look up A, do foo to it, and release the mutex 00:04:24 atomic operation 00:04:57 if someone else says "do delete to A", then either you get there first, and your op succeeds, or they get their first, and your op says "A not found" 00:05:07 no chance for lockup or crash in either case 00:05:21 get me a list of things in A 00:05:26 how many things are there? 00:05:28 15 00:05:34 ok lets do stuff to these 15 00:05:40 oh theres only 14 now 00:05:43 but if you were able to do "get me a pointer to A" and then later "modify the thing pointed to by this pointer", you can have trouble 00:06:08 sure 00:06:24 as I say, many languages do the reference counter thing 00:06:59 so you're saying that if somebody had said "get me a pointer to A", then until they say "I no longer need this pointer to A", that A would be locked? 00:06:59 but mutexs are another way 00:07:10 not locked no 00:07:15 but not deleteable 00:07:20 well you wouldn't be allowed to delete it 00:07:30 correct 00:08:16 if the thing is an integer or a float, then deleting it is simple 00:08:33 if its a more complex tihng, then it will likely have its own delete routines 00:08:37 in this case, the thing is a struct containing everything the HAL knows about a module 00:08:59 (which may write stuff back to a file or a db before it hits the bit bucket) 00:09:35 no need for that here 00:09:39 quite 00:09:57 but there is much cross coupling 00:10:01 there is a list of components 00:10:02 but delete routines or destructors are there if you need them in many languages 00:10:21 well, if theres lots of cross coupling 00:10:31 there is only one language relevant here - C 00:10:41 isnt the risk of someting wanted by one thingm being deleted by another thing there? 00:11:05 at least until you can reliably write kernel modules in Python, or Java, or such, at which point I quit programming again 00:11:16 well, you are trying to build waht is effectively a language .. HAL, on top of C 00:11:23 yes, in a way 00:11:30 so ... 00:11:57 you can either say "there is nothing out there that is relevant or similar .. all the problems here are unique" 00:12:11 or you pick bits that work from hopw other people have solved stuff 00:12:21 miscommunication 00:12:32 the trick is to pick the tight bits :))) 00:13:13 I'm trying to figure out _how_ to implemnet such things in the language I have 00:13:47 I thought you were telling me that "they are already implemented in language J" which isn't usefull to me 00:13:57 right, but these same problems have been solved before 00:14:02 agree 00:14:08 quite, 00:14:17 I wasnt suggesting you USE the other random language 00:14:36 but the implementation may be useful 00:14:54 true enough... for example, today I don't use reference counting 00:14:57 or at least worth looking at so you can say "yuck" :) 00:15:30 when someone says "delete signal foo", I must traverse the pin list to see if any pin is connected to signal foo, and if so disconnect it before deleting foo 00:15:58 although a ref count wouldn;t really help there, I need to know _which_ pins are linked to foo, not just how many 00:16:11 sort of 00:16:19 you could just never say delete_foo 00:16:36 what do you mean? 00:16:54 reference counting just says, "well, theres pins connectoed to it still, I guess its still neeeded 00:17:08 when you disconnnect the last pin, it deletes itself 00:17:16 but I don't want it to 00:17:29 well, thats fine, its an architecture decision 00:17:41 as a user, I want to declare the signal, then connect as few or many pins as I wish to it 00:18:01 if I disconnect them all, the signal should stay around, so I can connect more things to it later 00:18:09 ok 00:18:22 imagine you create a timer, and connect someting to it 00:18:26 OTOH, if I delete the signal, all the pins connected to it need to disconnect automatically, the user shouldn't have to do that 00:18:38 as you say, architecture issues 00:18:46 some other ting also conencts someting to the timer 00:19:07 the thing that created the timer beleives its now no longer needed and dleltes it 00:19:22 leaving the second thing now broken and timerless 00:19:34 so it goes 00:19:44 indeed 00:19:50 in HAL, the tings doing the creating and deleting are humans who are designing a system 00:20:18 tings wont get added, modified or deleted in realtime? 00:20:24 if I have an emc running and I choose to delete the step generator, it's gonna get deleted 00:20:38 actually, you might have something there 00:21:09 I still insist that if I truly want to delete a step generator even tho its got stuff connected to it, I should be able to 00:21:22 however, there might be benefit to warning the user that stuff is connected to it 00:21:38 indeed 00:21:56 if you did have that ... 00:21:58 the warnings could become a PITA very quickly 00:22:16 you could implement what many languages call a 'garbage collector' 00:22:30 walk the tree, find tihngs with no connections and bin them 00:22:30 no, never, no way 00:22:45 or, even as a user thing ? 00:22:58 'find me spare stuff ive forgeotten to connect'? 00:23:20 maybe a "delete unused" command or something, but certainly not as the primary method of freeing stuff 00:23:50 as seeen in a million an one pcb layou packages "wanirng: resitor R34 has no connections" 00:24:03 right 00:24:43 but again we're drifting away from the details that I was focused on 00:24:49 true 00:25:19 ref counts alone won't work because you almost certainly need to know _which_ things are referencing you, not just how many 00:25:21 mutex or reference count .. just dofferent answers to the same problem 00:25:31 nope - different problems 00:25:57 most languages just ahve an integer count 00:26:03 mutex is used to prevent simultaneous access while you are making changes 00:26:10 true 00:26:12 the changes may in turn change a reference count 00:26:33 for instance the linksp command links a signal to a pin 00:26:54 the command must verify that both signal and pin exist, then establish the linkage... in the process, the pin 00:26:57 oops 00:27:14 the pin's refcount and the signal's refcount will increase 00:27:58 but the entire process of verifying pin exists, verifying sig exists, verifying that they're compatibla, and connecting them, must be protected so somebody can't come in and delete the pin in the middle 00:28:10 quite 00:28:33 threads, 'synchronized' etc 00:28:45 the binary tree scheme is just a way to make the "verify pin exists" a little faster 00:29:22 you are going to ahve a fun time with all this you know :) 00:30:25 why do you say that? 00:31:20 you are going to go through pretty much all of writing your own high-level languiage ... 00:31:23 no mean feat 00:32:01 already did it once.. this is the HAL "refactor", remember 00:32:10 indeed 00:32:43 'plan to throw at least one away' :) 00:33:32 woner haow les is getting on with segmot 00:33:50 wonder how his mexican is getting on with sanding? 00:33:57 dunno 00:34:26 you have a terrible way of distracting me... I barely remember what zwisk and I were discussing ;-) 00:34:38 hm.. 00:35:00 you were traversing a changing list :) 00:35:18 right... changing from linear lists to binary trees 00:35:19 wata 00:35:33 * jmkasunich digs out his ancient balanced binary tree code 00:35:38 I think I got my self into to much stuff 00:35:39 again 00:35:45 :) 00:35:49 gezr: you are in a maze of twistign opassages, all different 00:36:30 hu? 00:37:03 old game on early mainframes 00:37:14 yeah, my prusit of C I think is going to have to go onto the back burner, I should work just on the bike and the emc ploter 00:37:31 this past week seems to have flown by 00:37:36 is that good? 00:37:52 and Im not sure I got anything done, I know I forgot to pay some bills, thats not a good thing 00:38:04 I did manage to clean up 1/2 my shop 00:38:39 Ide love to learn how to program, but I cant stay simple, im not ready for it yet 00:39:32 emc is proably not hte thing to cut your teeth on anyway 00:39:42 no and im not using it to do that 00:39:52 heh:) 00:39:56 its eventually a goal but not part of the learning 00:40:18 so ... how is the EMC powered plaotter going? 00:40:21 its like mastering the stroke but all were after is the grand fanal 00:40:45 I bought a 2x2 foot 1/2 thick plywood sheet to mount it to today 00:40:51 good call 00:41:00 Y is finished 00:41:01 I used 40mm MDF for my router 00:41:05 or its X 00:41:13 kew; 00:41:20 got a motor and a drive? 00:41:28 maybe tonight while im watching cartoons ill make the other slide 00:41:35 :) 00:41:52 yeah, drive is just my good ole ucn8054b chips 00:42:02 motors are just oh that should work, 00:42:06 nema23's 00:42:30 powersupply is computer standard, at style with a switch 00:42:47 lighting provided by 2 special light bars out of an old scanner 00:42:48 hm, could I just put in the pin definitions into the generic.ini and run? 00:43:19 since when I use the emc.ini the computer freezes.. 00:43:33 and im thinking I can use mr dremell as a fixed Z 00:44:24 whelp... I hit my kernel oops and had to reboot :) 00:44:41 gezr: are you going to hook it up and drive that first axis soon then? 00:44:42 how come you keep having oopses? 00:44:54 first one this project! :) 00:45:18 This time it's because I goofed up a return value and ended up in an endless loop inside the kernel. 00:45:20 robin_sz : yeah ive done that already 00:45:26 kewl :) 00:45:34 oh, I thought you said something earlier about expecting them 00:45:49 as if they were a regular occurance 00:45:50 thats a great ting to do .. once you see one move, you just ned two now to doa circle :) 00:46:34 hm.. 00:46:40 well... yeah, when you develop in the kernel, sooner or later you get the equivelent of a segfault in the kernel. If it's during module initialization, I haven't found a way to gracefully recover... 00:46:59 robin_sz : a circle, with an A in the middle 00:47:03 :) 00:47:13 cause once I get that taste my finacial situation may fall to anarchy 00:47:19 3d shapes are cool :) 00:47:37 zwisk: been there, done that 00:47:53 gezr: worry not, somehting will turn up 00:48:05 especially when I was working on RTAPI 00:48:51 hm, how far away is the vital cards from being usable? 00:49:09 * robin_sz passes anonimasu a piece of string 00:49:09 emc1 or emc2? 00:49:27 robin_sz: I meant with the interference issues.. 00:49:43 no eyed deer 00:49:48 jmkasunich: the default BDI one.. 00:50:58 emc1 then... I thought it already did work with emc1 00:51:06 * robin_sz nods 00:51:15 I thought it was 'testing' still ... 00:51:30 dunno - Paul and Abdul are involved in that 00:51:42 as in 'it appears to work, lets check to be sure' 00:52:11 ah ok 00:52:32 as soon as it's confirmed to be working good for a while I'll order one.. 00:55:07 it may have progressed since then, check with paul_c to be sure 00:55:56 ok 00:58:41 tired now, spent several hours assembling pallet racking and stacking stuff on it 01:01:06 if your going to bed goodnight 01:02:31 I'll be heading out for the shop in na bit 01:03:01 I think im gonna boot the emc box to win and watch some cartoons and play clean up some more 01:03:21 I need to get emc running if I am going to try this stuff out tomorrow.. 01:03:25 and then if I get that done I may do something else 01:03:53 Like work on getting the bike finished up 01:12:15 :) 01:13:46 gezr, remember those pictures... spent all day making a application/php script to gallery them for me. http://www.lloydleung.com/EMC 01:14:13 apt-get install gallery :) 01:14:24 Not what I watned. 01:14:36 gallery _can't_ just look at a directory and display thumbnials. 01:14:42 ah 01:14:47 I have to go through a whole process to enter them into the database. 01:14:58 I want something _simple_, thumbnails generation... 01:15:13 so I can just upload pictures, and wham done. 01:15:18 evreything is automated. 01:15:24 its cool 01:28:39 Imperator_ has quit 01:37:11 picnet has quit 01:43:34 ive got at least 100 feet of this stuff 01:44:59 18awg 300v 7pair with one coated, and one uncoated, I could call it 8 pair with a free ground I guess 01:45:16 good stuf? 01:50:08 what do you need it for? 01:50:09 :) 01:50:27 I hate when I have to maching small stuff... I have to go sooooo slow. 01:50:40 I wont need all of it :) 01:50:47 so Ill give whoever may need some some 01:50:58 machining O1 drill rod... with the diamter now down to 4.8mm... I'm going like 2000rpm or so, at 10mm/min 01:51:10 hmm 01:51:18 it's coming out very shiney. :) 01:51:21 if I don't... it chatters. 01:51:34 I have a live center supporting it already to. 01:51:39 thats good 01:51:43 whats your depth of cut? 01:51:48 0.05mm righ tnow. 01:51:49 and are you using an insert? 01:52:00 are you getting a stringy chip? 01:52:02 when it was larger I was doing 0.1mm 01:52:07 very stringy. 01:52:15 you need to take at least 1mm doc 01:52:16 I had a big clump of steelwool. 01:52:27 1mm?? 01:52:29 ONE!? 01:52:31 what sort of tool are you cutting with? 01:52:51 just a ground hss bit? 01:52:52 I'm using an carbide insert, that was originally good for ALuminium. 01:53:05 the stock was only 1/2" to begin with. 01:53:06 okay, whats the corner radius of the insert? 01:53:11 sec. 01:53:18 let me find the designation for the bit 01:53:52 toshiba tungaloy... DCGT 11T304 01:54:02 these puppies were $10USD a bit. 01:54:08 oh man 01:54:18 looking it up. 01:54:37 I cant tell the raidus for that, the 4 would be it, but thats like .063inch radius 01:54:59 http://www.carbidedepot.com/detail.asp?product_id=TT%20DCGT11T304PPH10T 01:55:11 err... maybe I paid 12.53 for them. 01:55:16 I bought them from that place. 01:56:12 yeah, you need to get your doc up there, so that you break your chip 01:56:13 radius maybe ~0.5mm... I'm comparing it to pencil lead. 01:56:31 the stringy stuff is okay for a finish pass, but those chips are deadly 01:56:37 gezr, does it matter? 01:56:44 I'm just curious as to why? 01:56:52 I've always machined stuff to be stringy... 01:57:00 we had a tech almost get his foot cut off by a stringy chip 01:57:07 it only stopped when it hit bone 01:57:24 this is string, not ribbons. 01:57:29 it's really soft. 01:57:45 I hate strings 01:57:51 and I have an encloser for my lathe as well. 01:57:54 they are razor blades that never end 01:58:21 I guess I could put pauses in my code to stop this kinda stuff. But they don't bother me so much. 01:58:23 that stuff should be chipping 01:58:29 chips get stuck to the bottom of my slippers. 01:58:39 yeah 01:58:40 robin_sz has quit 01:58:53 strings don't... they just get smooshed. 01:59:06 im not saying its wrong to have them, but you really want to be maching, 01:59:22 limitations are one thing, that is the first thing to be addressed 01:59:40 the little chips suck, I get them everywhere 02:00:16 but you can increase your machining time greatly 02:00:16 well... I was maching at these specs... 6 to 4mm radius, I was going at .2. 3-4mm I was going .15, 3-2.5mm I was going at .1. now I'm finishing at 0.05mm DOC. 02:00:30 gezr, I probably could... 02:00:44 realize that my spindle is 1:1 geared, and my spindle HP is rated at 1hp. 02:00:55 yeah limitations :) 02:01:16 if I had american iron, I'd definitely be maching with a higher DOC. 02:01:21 hahahaha 02:01:33 but hey... it's only my lathes time... and I can watch TV in the other room, or chat in here. :) 02:01:38 just work at a depth at least the radius of your tool 02:01:46 this is a swiss watch lathe... only so much abuse I can dish to it. 02:02:11 at lighter depths of cut, the part tends to want to push away from the insert 02:02:50 even when doing very light work 02:02:58 1/64 is the radius 02:03:21 0.016mm, 02:03:27 so .016inch 02:03:29 err. 0.016". 02:03:30 :) 02:03:49 I could do .4 DOC. 02:03:53 .4mm DOC 02:04:03 yeah 02:04:42 and you could feed at .4mm/rev 02:05:22 I cant remember the calculation right off the top of my head 02:05:39 rpm * mpm * .262 maybe it 02:05:54 slomo has quit 02:06:21 I cant really remember, its been a while 02:08:31 well... I'm right now making a shaft for my wormgear... dang it is time consuming... I'm getting it close to size, and using sandpaper in an 1" strip, to grind it down to size... 02:08:43 thats the best way :) 02:08:55 getting within 0.02mm and then grind. 02:09:21 press fit the worm on... and use a #53 drillbit on the shaft... stick a spring pin in. 02:14:32 I dont like stringy chips 02:14:54 then again, ive had a few #9's or sixes stuck in the bottom of my foot ouch 02:15:47 #9's or sixes? 02:16:02 this stuff I have is like steelwool... 02:16:05 very very fine. 02:16:36 oh cool 02:23:09 03zwisk 07halrefactor-0-1 * 10emc2/src/hal/ (hal_lib.c hal_priv.h hal_procfs.c components/blocks.c): (log message trimmed) 02:23:09 [root hal]# insmod hal_lib.o 02:23:09 [root hal]# insmod blocks.o 02:23:09 [root hal]# echo "blocks mux2" > /proc/hal/create 02:23:09 [root hal]# cat /proc/hal/show_blocks 02:23:11 0: blocks mux2 02:23:13 [root@vader hal]# cat /proc/hal/show_components 02:36:00 hmm... stupid spring pin is 1mm too long on either ends... looks like I'm gonna have to get the dremel out and grind the spring pin just a tad. 02:52:17 dremel is my friend. :) 03:05:23 http://lloydleung.com/EMC/Worm_Spindle/ 03:05:52 thats cool 03:08:30 jmt, are you still about? 03:08:37 urr... jmk I mean... 03:08:38 yeah 03:08:51 was away for a while, just got back 03:09:00 I've either wrapped my brain in a knot or found somethin' interesting... (to me anyway...) 03:09:17 I should probably have it change cursors when mouseover... 03:09:18 comp_t corresponds to things that call hal_init, not to individual 'parts'. Is that right? 03:10:22 right 03:10:28 hmm.. ok. 03:10:57 I think we want to change it such that comp_t (or block_t or part_t) corresponds to the specific part.... 03:11:09 we'll need both 03:11:42 one for the module (or library, or collection, or whatever we call the thing that makes multiple part types available) 03:11:50 and another for the individual parts 03:11:55 ok. What's the limitations on shared memory? How much can we get, and what's a good policy? Does severy part get it's own block? Every 'library' ? 03:12:20 right now all HAL shmem data is in one big block of shmem 03:12:34 we really don't want to be getting lots of different blocks 03:12:45 the block size can be pretty big 03:12:45 hmm.. ok. cool. 03:13:00 at one time I thought there was a 64K limit, but I don't think that's actually true 03:13:26 (though you'll notice that HAL uses a block that is just under 64K) 03:13:42 ok... that all seems good... 03:14:03 the only thing in HAL that uses a separate shmem block is halscope 03:14:27 the RT part of halscope captures data and sticks it in a shmem block, the user space part reads that data and displays it 03:14:42 ok... 03:14:46 picnet has joined #emc 03:15:16 doing another cvs up right now 03:15:41 fargle 03:15:59 fargle? 03:16:13 "rcsmerge: warning: conflicts during merge " 03:16:23 doh.. 03:18:06 found it - remember I said I fixed the declarations in the middle of the code... you did two, and we didn't use exactly the same whitespace, etc 03:18:20 ahh... 03:18:28 just deleted my copy, and cvs up again to get the official one 03:41:01 yuck 03:41:24 looks like kmalloc allocates memory in binary chunks, the smallest is 32 bytes 03:42:04 I'm gonna be allocating lots of 14 byte structs, with 18 bytes of waste in each one 03:45:05 unless I use kernel lookaside caches.... 03:57:14 picnet has quit 04:31:54 32 bytes minimum?? Ugh.... Tjat 04:31:57 isn't good... 04:32:39 this old code I'm reformatting and updating actually used some even older code that implemented a primitive "slab cache" 04:32:50 although I didn't call it that at the time 04:33:07 but I don't know if I want to port that stuff over 04:33:16 for now I'll just let it waste memory 04:34:05 I wrote the old code back in the days when you had to deal with near and far pointers and all that fun segment stuff 04:35:06 hmm.. sounds mac-like ... Didn't the 68k do some bank switching or something? 04:35:17 this was X86 04:35:30 16 bit X86 that is 04:35:44 Turbo-C originally, later ported to watcom 04:35:59 ahh... ok... then my comparison point is the 65816 with a bank register... :) 04:36:11 near pointers were stored as 16 bit, and could only address 64K 04:36:29 same thing on the 65816 04:36:30 far pointers were stored as segment:offset (32 bits) and could address 1 Meg 04:36:43 and beyond 1Meg wasn't available 04:37:28 that's one part of the old days that I _don't_ miss at all! ;-) 04:37:45 hmm... the 65816 had a higher limit... I had 4megs in mine... 04:39:07 what system was that? mac or something? 04:39:38 apple //gs 04:39:46 wow 04:40:03 for some reason I thought you were a young feller 04:40:17 haha... so, that dates me? ;) 04:40:35 somewhat... I can't pin it down too tightly cause I don't know apples 04:40:47 but it had to be pre-1990, right? 04:41:01 yup... 04:41:16 I was tinkering on the apple ][ in '81... 04:41:27 first computer I ever programmed on was a TRS-80, circa 78-80 04:41:39 I still have one of those :) 04:41:53 first one I ever owned was a Kaypro2 (Z-80, 64K) in 84-85 04:41:56 It's in Illinois, and I'm in California now, but ... it's fun to look at. 04:42:08 I still have the kaypro 04:42:30 Hmm... we may be about the same age then? 04:42:33