[Discuss-gnuradio] Software HDTV

[Daniel Piccoli]

I've heard that realtime software HDTV is not yet possible with current
processor speeds. Is it possible remedy this by using networked
distributed computing (provided we are on a low latency network)?



On Mon, 2003-09-08 at 00:07, address@hidden wrote:
> Send Discuss-gnuradio mailing list submissions to
>       address@hidden
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>       http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>       address@hidden
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>       address@hidden
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Discuss-gnuradio digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. I2C Addresses (Alan Gray)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2003 17:59:27 +1000
> From: Alan Gray <address@hidden>
> Subject: [Discuss-gnuradio] I2C Addresses
> To: address@hidden
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I've just finished designing and building the hardware for my RF front end 
> using the 4702 tuner and I'm looking to test it out. The structure of the 
> control data for the 4702 is quite different to the 4937 though, so I have 
> to go through and code a new interface for that side of things. Naturally 
> I'm basing this off the code in microtune_4937.cc, I believe I've got the 
> generation of the control bytes down, however I'm stumped about some 
> addressing issues, even though the address should be the same as when using 
> the 4937 according to data sheets.
> 
> In microtune_4937.cc the address listed for the tuner is 0x61 = 0110 0001
>  From the data sheets and the connections made (ie pin 11 to ground) I get 
> an address of 0xC0 = 1100 0000
> 
> As neither of these addresses worked correctly for me, I decided to test 
> communications with the MAX518 chip (as they are both connected to the same 
> bus I figured that would rule out any errors in transmission) and was able 
> to change the output voltage of the chip using the code in 
> microtune_eval_board.cc. Looking at the addresses used for the MAX518 chip, 
> the address in the program is 0x2C = 0010 1100, while that I calculate is 
> 0x58 = 0101 1000.
> 
>  From the MAX addresses, it looks like the address in the program is the 
> address I determined right circular shifted one position
> 0101 1000 ->right shift
> 0010 1100
> 
> However, while similar, the same does not hold for the 4937's address
> 
> 1100 0000 ->right shift
> 0110 0000
> which is 0x60 not 0x61
> 
> As such, I'm a little confused as to what address I should use, and how in 
> fact these should be generated. Any assistance anyone can provide would be 
> most appreciated as I believe if I can figure this out everything should be 
> go.
> 
> Alan
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> 
> 
> End of Discuss-gnuradio Digest, Vol 10, Issue 2
> ***********************************************