Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

Andrew Johnson <[email protected]> · Tue, 8 Jul 2008 15:39:41 -0500

Hi Bernd,

On Tuesday 08 July 2008 02:16:12 Bernd Schoeneburg wrote:
> The additional field attribute (copy to partner ioc: yes/no) is not
> implemented in this way. I have no good idea how to decide this without
> base modification.

The last time we talked about that you hadn't actually set that attribute on 
any of the base record types, so I wasn't sure whether you still need it or 
not.  I don't think it would be too hard to provide the attribute information 
to the CCE outside of the original DBD file, although admittedly it might 
complicate the code a bit.

At start-up the CCE would read one or more configuration files listing the 
record type field names of all the non-default fields and saying what their 
redundancy attribute setting should be.  Later the CCE code will have to do a 
parallel look-up in this structure to find that attribute value when it needs 
it, but it might be possible to reduce the workload by combining this 
information into some other data structures — that's hard to guess without 
seeing the code for the CCE though.

> Is it possible to control the ioc (redundancy status) by just using the
> top level functions iocPause and iocRun?

Yes; if you don't need control over the individual tasks then you can use 
those calls instead, and that would simplify some of my changes.  I suspect 
Jeff would much prefer that we provide only rsrv_pause() and rsrv_run() than 
to make the individual server subsystems visible in the way I currently do.  
I wasn't sure whether that would be Ok or not for the RMT since you then 
wouldn't have a 1:1 mapping between server tasks and start/stop routines, but 
I'm happy to take the extra routines out of rsrv if you don't need them.

- Andrew
-- 
Talk is cheap. Show me the code. -- Linus Torvalds

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System