Eclipse Community Forums: 4DIAC - Framework for Distributed Industrial Automation and Control » Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration

Home » Eclipse Projects » 4DIAC - Framework for Distributed Industrial Automation and Control » Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration

Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration [message #1846987]

Mon, 11 October 2021 07:51

Eclipse User

Hello,

I have two questions:
1) I just checked the implementation of readPin() and writePin() in sysfsprocint.cpp and I found the readPin() just returned a True. How is the IX so different from the code of writePin()? Is checkInputData() the actual method to read data from pin but why readPin() is used in IX.cpp?

index.php/fa/41123/0/

2) Any practice/comments/examples to integrate OPC UA functionalities to IX/QX? Would it be a natural style that IO-accessing FBs can be compatible with OPC UA?

Br,
Tuojian

Attachment: code.PNG
(Size: 86.16KB, Downloaded 285 times)

Re: Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration [message #1846988 is a reply to message #1846987]

Mon, 11 October 2021 08:39

Eclipse User

Hi Tuojian,

the reason for this difference is that we have in sysfs as well as in other IO interfaces an handler which is scanning the inputs and if needed generates IND events on the IX blocks. In order to not interfere between the two threads the readPin, which is triggered by the REQ event is in general doing nothing just assuming that the handler has recently updated the pin and therefore just send a CNF event. While looking at the code I noticed that there is a hardoced 10ms scanning loop. I remember that I never liked it. But we never found time to improve it.

The best would be to move the whole code to the new configurable IO concept that Johannes Meßmer developed in his Bachelor thesis. You can already see it applied in the embrick and new wago pfc implementation. An overview can be found in this paper: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8247577

I think this could also be the starting point for an OPC UA based IO concept. Or am I wrong.

Cheers,
Alois

Re: Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration [message #1847001 is a reply to message #1846988]

Mon, 11 October 2021 14:42

Eclipse User

Hi Alois,

Thanks for your fast reply!

Finally, I understand the execution chain that is: CIOHandler::run() -> updateReadData() -> checkInputData().

This is as I expected that checkInputData() is the method to read and update pin value but not the readPin().

I suppose the 10ms hardcoded scanning loop is CThread::sleepThread(10). Hope it could be improved in the future version.

For the paper you mentioned, it is indeed a good idea and it helps me solve the RevPi IO-accessing problem. I prefer this separated IO configuration resource idea. The symbolic link style could improve the portability of control applications. However, I think it is not relevant to OPC UA-integrated IO FBs. But it is still a good starting point., and I will try to do some practices.

Thanks a lot for your sharing!

Cheers,
Tuojian

Re: Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration [message #1847002 is a reply to message #1847001]

Mon, 11 October 2021 15:01

Eclipse User

Happy to support.

For the revpi there is already a modular IO config implementation [1]. Don't remember if I told you. I had to sort out one legal thing therefore it will not be in 2.0.0 but definitly in 2.1.0.

[1] https://git.eclipse.org/r/c/4diac/org.eclipse.4diac.forte/+/153699

Re: Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration [message #1847004 is a reply to message #1847002]

Mon, 11 October 2021 15:13

Eclipse User

Yes, you shared this with me in my last post and it works with RevPi. Just found one bug in CMakeLists that is to change "if(FORTE_MODULE_RevPiModularIO)" to "if(FORTE_IO_RevPiModularIO)" or change "forte_add_io" to "forte_add_module".

Re: Questions: readPin() implementation && OPC UA I/Os integration [message #1847005 is a reply to message #1847004]

Mon, 11 October 2021 15:44

Eclipse User

Ah now I remember. I really need to get that merged. The first thing todo after 2.0.0 release.

Previous Topic:	Deployment perspective missing
Next Topic:	Can forte be compile under macos?

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

Current Time: Thu May 15 05:10:34 EDT 2025

.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Breadcrumbs

Sign up to our Newsletter