-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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 a bit flag to heartbeat with synchronization flag #8
Comments
Feedback from SRM meeting:
|
Unresolved questionsStatus registerPros:
Cons / Questions:
Augmented heartbeat registerPros:
Cons / Questions:
|
Special status bits only for specific registersAn alternative proposal would be to reserve space in the general Harp message header to have "per-register" status / metadata. In this proposal, the status bits would then be set only for the heartbeat message, but without the need to extend the size of the register |
I don't think this is warranted since the synchronization protocol is not continuous (i.e synchronization is only ensured once every second). I think a periodic event is more inline with this. |
My suggestion was not to add this for every message, only for heartbeat events, hence register-specific status bits, I will explain better in the SRM, but I agree probably not worth it anyway. |
Feedback from SRM meeting:
|
Ok from all the past discussions I believe these are the critical points to move forward:
Related to #32 as this register could also report the error state of the device |
Feedback from the last meeting 22/02/2024:IntroWe want to leverage the heartbeat event to relay information about the current status of the device. For now, this could be circumscribed to the synchronization state of the device, but having the space to introduce extra flags later on is critical. This could be used to relay other "status" messages, such as error states, communication layer quality (e.g. for wireless devices), etc... Possible implementations:We ended up with three possible distinct implementations with respective pros and cons that I will briefly list. Use the current
|
Some more thoughts from the discussion:
Note The above notwithstanding, this is currently the only spontaneous change in the value of the register. All other bits seem intended as configuration states and will never be changed by the device. If a new status or heartbeat register is introduced, we can specifically introduce a new bit to represent whether the device is in active or standby mode (see below).
Note On further consideration, I feel we shouldn't entirely duplicate the state of
Warning The |
Notes from 29022024 We will go with the new additional register. I propose the following specs: Name: Heartbeat
I will draft a PR with a complete proposal |
It would be very helpful to have an additional flag indicating whether a device is currently synchronized (i.e. receiving a synchronization message on every second) is a source. This is super relevant for online QC but also when using the same clock device across multiple setups, since there is no easy way to communicate with the same clock synchronizer from two different computers for instance.
This change should probably be made to the core and result in a new release. If we add it as an additional array position, it should even be backward compatible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: