Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add 1 second to HarpTime (HarpSyncInputData node) #309

Closed
ChucklesOnGitHub opened this issue Sep 25, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #319
Closed

Add 1 second to HarpTime (HarpSyncInputData node) #309

ChucklesOnGitHub opened this issue Sep 25, 2024 · 2 comments · Fixed by #319
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@ChucklesOnGitHub
Copy link

No description provided.

@jonnew
Copy link
Member

jonnew commented Sep 26, 2024

I'll need a bit more info on this one.

@aacuevas
Copy link
Collaborator

It's one of these "what the hardware sends" vs "how it is interpreted".
Harp sends a uint32 value with the current timestamp (in full seconds) each second. But, the latch event for Harp devices to latch this timestamp is after it has already passed. i.e.: Timestamp 0 gets latched when 1 second has elapsed since the start, timestamp 1, 2 seconds from start, etc...

The hardware Harp device on ONIX just reports whatever value it has received from the clock generator. However, any other Harp device reports the values of their internal timestamps, which will then appear to be one second ahead of the one ONIX is receiving.
There are 3 solutions to this, so the timestamps appear aligned:
1- Add a second in hardware. For once, I believe this is incorrect. The hardware should just send what it receives. Since this is an "interpretation" thing, I believe it is the software duty.
2- Add a second to the output on the Harp node. This way the values of the Harp node output and any other Harp devices will appear aligned when just visualizing the outputs.
3- Just add the second in the workflow node used to convert ONI timestamps into Harp-aligned timestamps. At the end of the day, this is what people will be using to use Harp with the system, so it is only at this step where it will be required.

Although I believe 3 is the more "technically appropriate" solution, 2 is probably the one that will confuse the users the less, as they will just see the same timestamps if they just visualize them. So I would just do 2.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants