Open jonnew opened 1 year ago
Either that or the hub index (0,1,2), since addresses are also represented as A.B, but you are right that maintaining proper hub indexing
I think maintaining our formal addressing system will allow us to reduce surprise in general.
On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 3:31 PM Aarón Cuevas López @.***> wrote:
Either that or the hub index (0,1,2), since addresses are also represented as A.B, but you are right that maintaining proper hub indexing
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/open-ephys/onix-gateware-field-updaters/issues/2#issuecomment-1478469832, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAK47Y6LS3NBTYTQR67AYLLW5H62XANCNFSM6AAAAAAWC4KG5I . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: @.***>
Right now, the hub being targeted for an update is specified as a port index (0, 1, ..). But this differs from the usual way of specifying a hub's location, which is bits 15-8 in the device address. I think we should use the hub address instead (0, 256, 512, etc).