EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: CALC expression
From: Eric Norum <[email protected]>
To: Andrew Johnson <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 09:15:25 -0700
On Sep 29, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Andrew Johnson wrote:
...

We *could* make RPCL into a char* pointer and allocate it dynamically
according to the particular _expression_, but that means making code changes to
the record and also opens up the possibility of free memory fragmentation on
vxWorks IOCs (none of the other standard record types allocate memory after
initialization to avoid that).  I think it's too late to make those kind of
changes at this point.
How long has it been since someone actually tested vxWorks to see if it still exhibit this fragmentation issue?
Sometimes urban legends are just that.


Alternatively we could add integer literal support to the code in libCom/calc,
which would reduce the incremental expansion factor from 21/4 to 10/3 or
better, but again that would be making code changes uncomfortably late in the
development cycle for 3.14.12.
Are the changes that extensive?


I would not worry /too/ much about wasted space.  After all, every record
has a 41-character DESC field, most of them are permanently empty, and I
don't recall hearing complaints about that.

Making CALC 80 translates to RPCL being 419 bytes instead of its current 209
bytes.  Lewis' suggestion of 64 bytes translates to RPCL being 335 bytes.

Do any small-IOC guys want to weigh in on these suggestions?
I'm about ready to admit defeat.
Plus, making the integer literal change could make the RPCL increase much less significant (or even non-existent)

-- 
Eric Norum
[email protected]





Replies:
Re: CALC expression Andrew Johnson
RE: CALC expression Redman, Russell
References:
CALC expression Andrew Wagner
Re: CALC expression Andrew Johnson
Re: CALC expression Tim Mooney
Re: CALC expression Andrew Johnson

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: CALC expression Andrew Johnson
Next: Re: CALC expression Pam Gurd
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: CALC expression Andrew Johnson
Next: Re: CALC expression Andrew Johnson
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 29 Sep 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·