Why real time kernel is needed with board like MESA?

stivemaster13 wrote:

The answer is simple - because LinuxCNC is not evolving to use the available hardware. Meats are also not interested in such development, they just make money!
Otherwise, FPGA can do perfectly the critical part of the job - real time and work with inputs and outputs. You just have to tell her exactly what you want!
What's worse is that people who are really involved in the development of the Linux CNC don't really understand what it should look like in order to be liked by people, not just themselves.

I dont understand you. Maybe its a language barrier but why do you keep pointing out that the way LinuxCNC does things is wrong? Are you trolling?, trying to stir up the people on this forum?

If you dont want to use LinuxCNC, I am sure MachineKit or Mach3/4 or UCCNC or a MASSO controller will do what you want. Otherwise design your own proprietary hardware and software like every other business and try to sell it.

They all know how to "do it better", but when push comes to shove, meh.

stivemaster13 lets see a viable prototype of what you propose. Then it can be proved one way or the other which is better.

I honestly think if Mesa were just interested in "making money" we wouldn't get the support we do through the forum. Go thru the forum and see how many times people have asked for a bit file to have this or have that and it's been provided.

I have even seen PCW offer to supply a schematic of a Mesa product to help someone repair their own damaged board.

The information in this thread has really helped me understand, generally, things about how Linuxcnc works that I didn't grasp before.

Excellent thread, right up until Mr. Buzzkill entered the scene.

Oh God, how much sorrow there is in this world!
Only they hadn't called me a rebel!
In this forum, ideas and constructive criticism are clearly rewarded - with contempt.
Obviously, the collective opinion is - what you do not like in what we have achieved, we will not move a mm forward.
No problem, no one can make anyone think and want to develop.
I just want to say that unlike most members of this forum I am 50 years old!
So the time is yours, not so much mine - unfortunately.
I'm sorry if anyone felt ready to rebel, if they thought about what I wrote.
Here are some links to look at the world outside of the LinuxCNC forum.
I will start with the Chinese, who have taken this topic very seriously and their scientific circles are working on it, not volunteers:
www.researchgate.net/publication/2518572..._look-ahead_function

pdf.sciencedirectassets.com/278653/1-s2....0e4gxrqb&type=client

And I will continue with people who have fun with this activity:

sites.google.com/site/tgptechnologies/fp...c-steppers-interface

hackaday.com/2015/09/21/fpga-cnc/

github.com/mhouse1/mechsoftronic

www.cnczone.com/forums/general-cnc-machi...onics/26465-cnc.html

Finally, I want to clarify - that Mesa are responsive and provide information about their products is a good commercial practice, nothing more.
In fact, the interesting thing is - do Mesa not know what the possibilities of FPGA are, since they themselves produce this?
Then why are FPGAs used as DSPs instead of insisting to the LinuxCNC community that these devices can play a far greater role than what is given to them today, from today's level of the LinuxCNC?

P.P. Regarding buffering - absolutely every CNC uses buffering (without LinuxCNC) the only differences are in how exactly it sets the tasks after that, whether it uses DSP or FPGA and how exactly it does it!

stivemaster13 wrote:

I just want to say that unlike most members of this forum I am 50 years old!

Meaning no offense to anyone but I never got the impression this was a young man's forum... Maybe I'm wrong?