[USRP-users] two X310s in one RFNoC flowgraph

Rob Kossler rkossler at nd.edu
Fri Feb 1 13:28:18 EST 2019


If you use 2 X310 with non-TwinRx daughterboards, it can work with the same
flowgraph (including the fosphor block)?  I ask because I am  wondering if
there could be a bug in the fosphor block's handling of device number
(either gr-ettus or uhd).
Rob

On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 1:19 PM Jason Matusiak <jason at gardettoengineering.com>
wrote:

> When I run my flowgraph with the addresses setup that worked before
> twinrx, it starts to set everything up and seems to be talking to both ip
> addresses.  Then it craps out here:
>
> [WARNING] [RFNOC] Assuming max packet size for 0/DDC_0
> [WARNING] [RFNOC] Assuming max packet size for 0/DDC_1
> [WARNING] [RFNOC] Assuming max packet size for 1/DDC_1
> [WARNING] [RFNOC] Assuming max packet size for 1/DDC_0
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/opt/gnuradio/rfnoc/src/gr-ettus/examples/rfnoc/rfnoc_fosphor.py",
> line 644, in <module>
>     main()
>   File "/opt/gnuradio/rfnoc/src/gr-ettus/examples/rfnoc/rfnoc_fosphor.py",
> line 632, in main
>     tb = top_block_cls()
>   File "/opt/gnuradio/rfnoc/src/gr-ettus/examples/rfnoc/rfnoc_fosphor.py",
> line 475, in __init__
>     self.device3.connect(self.uhd_rfnoc_streamer_fft_0_0_0.get_block_id(),
> 0, self.uhd_rfnoc_streamer_fosphor_1.get_block_id(), 0)
>   File
> "/opt/gnuradio/rfnoc/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/ettus/ettus_swig.py",
> line 1264, in connect
>     return _ettus_swig.device3_sptr_connect(self, *args)
> RuntimeError: RuntimeError: On node 1/fosphor_1, input port 0 is already
> connected.
>
> >>> Done
>
> That error at the end is usually what you see when you try to use a single
> block twice without setting up the block select value.  I have checked
> things about 50 times, and I have everything setup right as device 1 and 2,
> and the blocks (I started with a working flowgraph for non TwinRX X310s),
> but I keep getting that error.
>
> If feels like there is a UHD issue that when it is trying to setup which
> block goes with which device, it thinks that there is only one device....
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Rob Kossler <rkossler at nd.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 1, 2019 1:14 PM
> *To:* Jason Matusiak
> *Cc:* Ettus Mail List
> *Subject:* Re: [USRP-users] two X310s in one RFNoC flowgraph
>
> How is it failing?
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 1:11 PM Jason Matusiak <
> jason at gardettoengineering.com> wrote:
>
> Yep, works fine.  When I am doing it in companion, it also reports info on
> both boxes while setting it up, but it feels like it only tries to talk to
> the first one it sees.
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Rob Kossler <rkossler at nd.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 1, 2019 1:08 PM
> *To:* Jason Matusiak
> *Cc:* Ettus Mail List
> *Subject:* Re: [USRP-users] two X310s in one RFNoC flowgraph
>
> Perhaps run uhd_usrp_probe with
> --args="addr0=192.168.30.2,addr1=192.168.40.2" and make sure that it is
> happy and shows you all of the blocks.
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:17 PM Jason Matusiak <
> jason at gardettoengineering.com> wrote:
>
> Upon further review, even though this worked, it doesn't seem to work for
> dual X310s with TwinRXs in it.  Anyone have any multi-usrp advice with that
> (since I pretty much no experience with TwinRX)?  I figure there might be a
> clue that there could help me with the rfnoc side of things.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jason Matusiak
> *Sent:* Friday, February 1, 2019 9:43 AM
> *To:* Rob Kossler
> *Cc:* Ettus Mail List
> *Subject:* Re: [USRP-users] two X310s in one RFNoC flowgraph
>
>
> Rob,
>
>
> I just figured it out (I found lots of people asking the question, but no
> answers, so hopefully this can help someone else).
>
>
> 1st - Set the "device select" option to 0 and 1 for the different X310s
> (usually you leave it at -1, but change the block select, but here we need
> to mod it).
>
> 2nd - you need a single Device3 like usual
>
> 3rd - under the Device Arguments block, add in your two IP addresses using
> the key of addr0 and addr1 like this: "addr0=192.168.30.2,
> addr1=192.168.40.2" (I tried it both with and without the quotes and it
> works fine either way),
>
>
> Now, Device 0 will get associated with addr0, and device 1 will get
> associates with addr1.
>
>
> I hope that makes sense and helps someone.
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Rob Kossler <rkossler at nd.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, February 1, 2019 9:23 AM
> *To:* Jason Matusiak
> *Cc:* Ettus Mail List
> *Subject:* Re: [USRP-users] two X310s in one RFNoC flowgraph
>
> Hi Jason,
> Given that under the hood, the stock multi_usrp (along with legacy_compat)
> implements an RFNoC graph, it must be possible.  I have run multiple X310s
> with the stock multi_usrp.  I have looked at legacy_compat pretty
> thoroughly and it keeps track of blocks as a function of device number
> (motherboard).  If I had a 2nd X310 handy, I would try it with my own
> non-stock multi_usrp object, but I don't - sorry.
> Rob
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 8:30 AM Jason Matusiak via USRP-users <
> usrp-users at lists.ettus.com> wrote:
>
> Is it possible to have a single flowgraph that has 2 X310s running RFNoC
> in it?  I can't seem to figure out a way to make it work, though I think
> there must be a way.  Both streams would be streaming to the same host
> machine for processing.
>
>
> Thanks.
> _______________________________________________
> USRP-users mailing list
> USRP-users at lists.ettus.com
> http://lists.ettus.com/mailman/listinfo/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ettus.com/pipermail/usrp-users_lists.ettus.com/attachments/20190201/0036a3fc/attachment.html>


More information about the USRP-users mailing list