I'm actually happy that the buffer isn't full. I'm just surprised that it's always empty.
The input is at 8msps. It flows into an interpolation block to decimate to 2msps. Your comment about interpolation has me thinking. When you say "hogs" is that scheduler hogging, or just general CPU usage? I'm running on a very capable box with lots of spare CPU cycles/cores.
Does 0% make sense in this case?
Are there other methods I can/should call to get deeper into the buffer usage (like absolute number of items in the buffer)?
---
Jim Melton
Principal Software Engineer
Sierra Nevada Corporation
From: Discuss-gnuradio <discuss-gnuradio-bounces+jim.melton=sncorp.com@gnu.org> On Behalf Of Jeff Long
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 14:13
To: GNURadio Discussion List <discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: file_sink and performance monitoring
As you noticed, the scheduler currently has some corner cases, and changes to the flowgraph can affect which blocks see backpressure or starvation. We recently noticed that interpolators can become hogs even at very low rates for this reason.
The file sink may benefit from an output multiple. The scheduler does not allow changing of output multiple in a running flowgraph, so this could cause output to be truncated to a multiple. There is no guarantee that all samples make it through a flowgraph at termination, so this may not matter. The main reason I imagine file sinks affect performance (other than just adding another block) is that they write to disk.
Yes, you may find blocks where the buffer is never full. This isn't wrong, and it tells you that that block isn't causing backpressure or seeing it from downstream blocks.
No comments:
Post a Comment