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

Improve support for matching connections through a hub #249

Open
bocchino opened this issue Apr 14, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #512
Open

Improve support for matching connections through a hub #249

bocchino opened this issue Apr 14, 2023 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #512
Assignees
Labels
proposed feature A proposed new feature semantics Issues related to semantics spec Issues related to the FPP language specification user's guide Issues related to the FPP User's Guide
Milestone

Comments

@bocchino
Copy link
Collaborator

bocchino commented Apr 14, 2023

The matched port checker does not play well with the hub pattern. When it sees a pair (p1, p2) of matched ports, it expects each connection C with one end at p1 to have a unique instance I(C) at the other end, and it looks for a matching connection between p2 and I(C). This works fine for matched connections in a single physical deployment, but when matched connections cross a hub boundary everything is connected to a single hub instance, so the pattern doesn't work.

To fix this, we can allow explicitly unmatched connections, like this:

command connections instance cmdDisp

connections CmdReg {
  unmatched hub.genericSerialOut[0] -> cmdDisp.cmdRegIn[0]
  unmatched hub.genericSerialOut[1] -> cmdDisp.cmdRegIn[1]
  ...
}

That way the command registration commands going through the hub can be manually numbered and explicitly unmatched, and the graph pattern specifier and matched numbering will fill in the rest.

In the future we can auto-generate the hub instances and the unmatched connections from matched, hub-free connections that span subtopologies, on each side of the network.

@bocchino bocchino added semantics Issues related to semantics spec Issues related to the FPP language specification user's guide Issues related to the FPP User's Guide labels Apr 14, 2023
@bocchino bocchino added the proposed feature A proposed new feature label Jan 4, 2024
@bocchino bocchino added this to the FPP v2.2.0 milestone Aug 22, 2024
@jwest115 jwest115 linked a pull request Sep 20, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
proposed feature A proposed new feature semantics Issues related to semantics spec Issues related to the FPP language specification user's guide Issues related to the FPP User's Guide
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants