| 02:30 | RexOrCine | New AXIOM Beta and AXIOM Shell exploded - https://wiki.apertus.org/images/d/d3/00-ABExp-001_AXIOM_Beta_in_AXIOM_Shell_Exploded_V5.jpg
|
| 03:03 | Bertl_oO | oh my ... we should have been more careful I guess? :)
|
| 03:26 | dev_ | joined the channel |
| 03:30 | dev_ | BAndiT1983|away, When we call the SetRedChannel again, it should assign pointer to next red channel
|
| 03:31 | dev_ | which is not doing , as i am fixing the OCImage, and the _redData is no longer contain nullptr
|
| 03:32 | dev_ | so it keeps pointing the first one every time we call it
|
| 03:32 | dev_ | I think , that is the problem
|
| 03:34 | dev_ | left the channel |
| 03:36 | aombk | joined the channel |
| 03:45 | Bertl_oO | off to bed now ... have a good one everyone!
|
| 03:45 | Bertl_oO | changed nick to: Bertl_zZ
|
| 03:48 | RexOrCine | changed nick to: RexOrCine|away
|
| 04:44 | aombk | left the channel |
| 04:53 | dev_ | joined the channel |
| 04:58 | dev_ | why are you debayering in MLV loader and again in presenter? : In MLV loader, The code only extract red, green and blue channel using downscaler (line 226, 228) , there is no debayering . while in processingtest::show , the frames are getting debayered using algorithms like bilinear, SHOODAK etc
|
| 05:00 | dev_ | the extracted red,green, blue channel in loader, is stored in buffer present in allocator (_mem) while in processingtest , I am trying to access those channels by setting them again in ocimage object and debayer it with chosen algorithm
|
| 05:35 | dev_ | left the channel |
| 05:35 | dev_ | joined the channel |
| 05:41 | dev_ | left the channel |
| 06:44 | aombk | joined the channel |
| 07:36 | dev_ | joined the channel |
| 07:43 | dev_ | left the channel |
| 07:49 | niemand | joined the channel |
| 07:50 | dev_ | joined the channel |
| 07:56 | dev_ | left the channel |
| 08:21 | BAndiT1983|away | changed nick to: BAndiT1983
|
| 08:23 | BAndiT1983 | dev_, sorry, but you don't understand the principles of the application and the code
|
| 08:23 | BAndiT1983 | downscaler is the alternative to debayering, to avoid the need to interpolate, it grabs only known pixels, but debayering interpolates unknown ones in each channel
|
| 08:24 | BAndiT1983 | this is a serious lack of knowledge which rises my doubts that you can complete the gsoc task at all
|
| 08:50 | Y_G | joined the channel |
| 09:32 | Y_G | left the channel |
| 09:43 | Nira|away | changed nick to: Nira
|
| 10:15 | se6astian|away | changed nick to: se6astian
|
| 11:11 | BAndiT1983 | changed nick to: BAndiT1983|away
|
| 11:41 | Nira | changed nick to: Nira|away
|
| 11:43 | BAndiT1983|away | changed nick to: BAndiT1983
|
| 11:59 | Bertl_zZ | changed nick to: Bertl
|
| 11:59 | Bertl | morning folks!
|
| 12:40 | Y_G | joined the channel |
| 12:55 | BAndiT1983 | hi Y_G, as the current state of WebUI is rather unknown, as Francis is absent for quite some time, you could circumvent the problem by implementing a really simple HTML page and send requests to WSServer
|
| 12:55 | BAndiT1983 | can assist you there, as it was done at the beginning of the development also
|
| 12:55 | BAndiT1983 | if you want, then i can try to restore the old test page and give you the sources
|
| 13:00 | Y_G | Hi BAndiT1983 ,I have done some web-dev ,so it should not be difficult to set up the page ,will need to go through the current state
|
| 13:01 | Y_G | What priority is the WebUI currently?
|
| 13:02 | BAndiT1983 | it has to be restored, like gulp tasks reviewed and actual state, but i would suggest that you create just a simple test page for daemon communication through WSServer for now
|
| 13:02 | BAndiT1983 | so prio 1 is daemon and it'S comms
|
| 13:02 | BAndiT1983 | prio 2 is web page comms
|
| 13:03 | BAndiT1983 | we had several attempts for web UI, like plain JS, vue.js, current one uses riot.js
|
| 13:04 | BAndiT1983 | it has to settle down at some point, as this constant changes are just creating a lot of gaps, because it's hard to continue when you have to learn new framework every time
|
| 13:05 | Bertl | I've heard there is a nice web framework for rust ... :)
|
| 13:08 | BAndiT1983 | yes, let's grab another technology and start all over
|
| 13:09 | Y_G | hmm, allow me some time (around 2) weeks for Daemon and it's communication and then we can create the plan for WebUI maybe ?
|
| 13:10 | BAndiT1983 | Y_G, sounds good, we should also arrange a meeting with Bertl and se6astian to check on priorities of functionality in scripts, as the GDocs file contains some which cannot be implemented right now, as FPGA gateware is not done yet
|
| 13:10 | BAndiT1983 | Bertl, the problem is not a framework, but how to pack everything in web UI so it's self-contained
|
| 13:11 | Bertl | no worries, it was a joke ...
|
| 13:12 | Y_G | Yes that meeting would be really helpful
|
| 13:12 | Bertl | (not rust or rocket/iron)
|
| 13:13 | Bertl | from my side, everything after noon (not necessarily afternoon) is fine
|
| 13:13 | Bertl | i.e. check with se6astian when he can make some time and you should be good
|
| 13:13 | BAndiT1983 | Bertl, i know, but many people are taking it seriously
|
| 13:16 | Bertl | obviously not seriously enough when I read your discussions with dev ...
|
| 13:21 | BAndiT1983 | gsoc should be seen as preparation for later work life, so it's important to invest enough time to learn the basics and then move to advanced stuff
|
| 13:25 | BAndiT1983 | Bertl, have you checked the beta at the hub, before the install? seems like the firmware has quite some problems
|
| 13:28 | BAndiT1983 | but the setup which was done last year is great, especially when i can look at the webcam and check if lights are on, and the cherry on the cake is the HDMI live feed from the cam
|
| 13:40 | BAndiT1983 | here was downscaler already explained -> http://irc.apertus.org/index.php?day=02&month=06&year=2019
|
| 13:43 | Bertl | as I wrote two weeks ago (and repeated a week ago or so), the remote Beta has the (back then) latest image from vup (for testing) and problems with the image (I also reported problems with the startup) should be checked with vup
|
| 13:45 | Bertl | so, please coordinate and check with rex/seb when somebody is at the hub if a new image needs to be written to the SD card, otherwise remote updates should be possible as well
|
| 13:47 | Bertl | (most likely only a few scripts need updating there)
|
| 13:47 | BAndiT1983 | ok, will do, as i lack an overview of things at the hub ;) it's a bit far away
|
| 13:48 | BAndiT1983 | have already got some improvements from Y_G for it and will try them later
|
| 13:49 | Y_G | left the channel |
| 16:03 | BAndiT1983 | off for a moment, will be back later
|
| 16:03 | BAndiT1983 | changed nick to: BAndiT1983|away
|
| 18:04 | supraraj | joined the channel |
| 18:07 | BAndiT1983|away | changed nick to: BAndiT1983
|
| 18:17 | Nira|away | changed nick to: Nira
|
| 18:25 | BAndiT1983 | changed nick to: BAndiT1983|away
|
| 18:30 | supraraj | left the channel |
| 19:30 | Fares | joined the channel |
| 19:30 | Fares | Hi
|
| 19:36 | Bertl | hey
|
| 19:38 | Fares | Hi Bertl, how are you?
|
| 19:39 | Bertl | fine, thanks! and you?
|
| 19:40 | Fares | I'm fine too thank you
|
| 19:40 | Fares | I have pushed last changes on github now
|
| 19:40 | Bertl | great! tx!
|
| 19:40 | Fares | I spent last week testing the core and fixing some bugs
|
| 19:40 | Fares | I also did several tests on the fpga
|
| 19:41 | Bertl | sounds good
|
| 19:41 | Fares | and it does work correctly so far
|
| 19:42 | Bertl | even better! :)
|
| 19:42 | Fares | it is on github named "integration_3" and I packaged it with axi stream interfaces
|
| 19:42 | Bertl | okay
|
| 19:44 | Fares | I synthesized the 50,100,142,200MHZ, it failed with 200MHZ, but I overclocked the 142MHZ design and it work but I know that is not a reliable thing. so regarding our last conversation to run some parts with higher clock speeds, I was synthesize the whole core with 200MHZ, It will consume only half of the resources
|
| 19:45 | Fares | I synthesized the core at 50..*
|
| 19:45 | Fares | I was thinking to synthesize the whole core*
|
| 19:45 | Fares | sorry for the mistakes
|
| 19:46 | Bertl | no problem
|
| 19:46 | Fares | so for now the design is to accept 4 pixel every second, with 100MHZ that is 100 million pixels at max, which is enough to do 4096 * 3072, so every piece of logic in the pipeline is repeated four times, and in the last part it work with big buffer
|
| 19:47 | Fares | if the core run at 200MHZ, I will only need to work with two pixels per cycle which mean half the logic and smaller buffer, is that a good thing to pursue?
|
| 19:48 | Bertl | yup, so if you can crank it up to 200MHz, it's roughly half the resources
|
| 19:48 | Fares | 4 pixel every cycle**
|
| 19:48 | Fares | 400 million pixels** sorry
|
| 19:49 | Fares | enough to do 4096 * 3072 at 30 fps
|
| 19:49 | Bertl | yeah, if we can do more, even better
|
| 19:50 | Fares | more MHZ?
|
| 19:50 | Bertl | so it makes sense (to some extend) to see where the limitations are
|
| 19:53 | Fares | so generally I should try to maximize the clk speed in the design? to what extend?
|
| 19:55 | Bertl | well, both the clock rate and the parallelism have significant implications on the usability
|
| 19:55 | Bertl | i.e. if we can get higher clock rate while reducing the parallel units, we have less resource usage (not necessarily less power consumption)
|
| 19:56 | Bertl | when we have enough resources, it might also make sense to use higher clock rates (maybe not that high) to make it work with higher frame rates
|
| 20:01 | Fares | okay, the parallelism is relatively easy to do, not sure about higher clock rate. so what is the priority now if we can do both?
|
| 20:02 | Bertl | the priority is probably to integrate it in the existing codebase (for both Beta and Micro)
|
| 20:02 | Bertl | then I'd say you want to tune it and get an idea what can be done regarding clock rate
|
| 20:03 | Bertl | and what resources a 'single' instance actually requires
|
| 20:03 | Bertl | and of course, how that scales when you have 2 or 4 (or maybe even more)
|
| 20:05 | Fares | integrating it with the existing codebase will put constraints on the clock rate correct? you mean by single instance, one pixel/cycle?
|
| 20:07 | BAndiT1983|away | changed nick to: BAndiT1983
|
| 20:09 | Bertl | well, the clock is rather flexible in the current design
|
| 20:10 | Bertl | don't forget, you are basically reding from DDR and writing to either an external FPGA or DDR memory again
|
| 20:10 | Bertl | in both cases the clock can be somewhere between 50-300MHz
|
| 20:13 | Fares | okay
|
| 20:13 | Fares | I think I would need to refactor the code to easily generate 1/2/4/.. in parallelism, tune the design, then during the integration we can pick the suited one
|
| 20:14 | Bertl | why not
|
| 20:19 | Fares | okay :) so the code is now on Github if you want to check it. Later, I will push the code I used to test it on the fpga. then I will start refactor the code and write last module to detect and fix 0xFF bytes
|
| 20:19 | Bertl | sounds good!
|
| 20:21 | Fares | well okay, thank you for your time!
|
| 20:21 | Bertl | thanks for the update!
|
| 20:25 | Fares | left the channel |
| 21:06 | Nira | changed nick to: Nira|away
|
| 22:28 | se6astian | changed nick to: se6astian|away
|
| 22:38 | BAndiT1983 | changed nick to: BAndiT1983|away
|
| 22:50 | niemand | left the channel |