Subject: |
Re: A channel access problem probably due to something else. |
From: |
[email protected] |
Date: |
Wed, 12 Oct 94 15:40:00 -0500 |
>These records are all processed synchronously, so it appears that I
>don't need to mess with PACT. Is this a reasonable assumption?
Yes. This is true for synchronous records.
>Any pointers/suggestions/wild guesses will be greatly appreciated.
Going from periodic to passive _should_ not make any difference to the
driver. I would make sure that a passive record that gets processed
due to a poke at the PROC field is working properly before embarking on
other fun things like CA links.
What you probably have is a spin in an IRQ handler... is the VME light
stuck on? That would indicate that something is spinning on a value it
is getting from an IO board. Do you have a VME backplane tracer? I
have found them to be of great value at times like this.
--John
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
A channel access problem probably due to something else. Bill Brown
- Next:
[none given] Anthony F. Pietryla
- 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:
A channel access problem probably due to something else. Bill Brown
- Next:
epics Device Drivers Thomas Dean
- 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
|