90 likes | 208 Views
Proposal for beam-process handling in FESA Alexander Schwinn. Beam Production Chain 1 (BPCID=1). Beam Production Chain 2 (BPCID=2). BPCID = 1. BPID 1. BPID 2. BPID 3. BPID 4. BPCID = 567. BPCID = 1. BPID 47. BPID 1. BPID 2. BPID 3. BPID 4. BPCID = 2. BPID 2.1. BPID 55. BPID 56.
E N D
Proposal for beam-process handling in FESA Alexander Schwinn
Beam Production Chain 1 (BPCID=1) Beam Production Chain 2 (BPCID=2) BPCID = 1 BPID 1 BPID 2 BPID 3 BPID 4
BPCID = 567 BPCID = 1 BPID 47 BPID 1 BPID 2 BPID 3 BPID 4 BPCID = 2 BPID 2.1 BPID 55 BPID 56 BPID 57 BPID 58 BPID 2.71 BPID 2.72
4,7 4,7 5,6 5,8 1,3 5,0 9,7 9,9 9,7 9,7 6,2 6,5 9,7 9,7 3,3 3,3 9,7 9,7 FESA – Multiplexing current implementation sync. slot 01 read Realtime slot 02 write slot 03 Server • All fields exist x-times, where x is the multiplexing depth • This depth is allocated at startup, not possible to change depth during runtime. • It is possible to mark fields as “extra-multiplexed” The multiplexing depth of these fields is: • base-depth + extra-mux. depth slot 04 slot 05 slot 06 slot 07 slot 08 slot 09
Problems – Extra-Multiplexing Lack of flexibility. The base-cycles of the extra-multiplexing need to have the same names/indexes than the ones for the usual (USER) multiplexing. That’s a blocker for the BeamProcess - approach. Complicated set up for extra-multiplexing in instantiation-file. Additional, optional field-attribute in the design (@extra-multiplexed)
Possible Solution Choice of the multiplexing-criteria per field List of possible choices is lab-specific Example: Additional benefit: We can get rid of data/timing-domain-data in the class-design We can get rid of the main-Mux-criterion in the Inst.-File CERN GSI
Cycle1 Cycle2 BPID 1.0 BPID 1.1 BPID 1.3 BPID 2.0 BPID 2.0 BPID 2.0 BPID 2.0 BPID 1.2 Field: condensator_load - Indizierung per Cycle Depth=2 Field: voltage - Indexing per BPID Depth=11 BPID 1.4 BPID 1.6 BPID 1.5