| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
shawn_s
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 4
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:19 am Post subject: Sluggish/Unpredictable Results on 8910 Arrow Keys Using LDKP |
 |
|
Hi all. I've just recently joined your community and love all of the basic JP1/IR/KM functionality that I've been able to add to my URC-8910 remote. After getting my remote all set up, I added the 8910 extender and started coding LKP and DKP functionality for my remote. It mostly works, but I'm seeing strange behavior when I try using DKPs on my up/down/left/right buttons for my Motorola 6412 Cable Box/DVR. I wanted the single key presses to move one box at a time when I'm in the guide (or menu) and double key presses to perform day+/- and page +/-. I set this up on the Special Protocol Functions tab in IR with a delay of 1 (I found longer delays just made the single key presses of the arrows too sluggish to bear). But now in addition to the normal single key presses being very slow to react (too much wait time before the guide actually received the arrow command), I find the buttons sometimes don't even work. Sometimes I need to hold the button down (remember, this was a DKP, not a LKP) for a second or two before the cable box processes the command.
I'm at work, so I can't verify this, but I originally coded the DKP stuff with having the DEV_CBL command being the first command of both the SKP and the DKP. Would taking this out speed things up? If the button is for the CBL device and if I've pressed the CBL button on my remote before pressing these keys, won't the DEV_CBL's be redundant and unnecessary? Here's how I currently have it coded:
CBL; Down; DKP(1); SKP: DEV_CBL, Shift-Down; DKP: DEV_CBL, Phantom 3 (Page Down EFC)
Would this work as good or better:
CBL; Down; DKP(1); SKP: Shift-Down; DKP: Phantom 3 (Page Down EFC)
Bottom line: are there any other people who are having sluggish response issues when starting to use the DKP or LKP? And does anyone know why my buttons would start going haywire from time to time? I can post my IR file if that would help. Thanks again!
Shawn |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nils_Ekberg
Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 1689
Location: Near Albany, NY
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think changing your entries is going to make much of a difference. Many people have reported that the buttons feel and act sluggish when using DKP. Plus some people have reported button sensitivity causing missed key presses.
Not many people are using the DKP function and have switched to the LKP option. I myself like a very short duration or 1 or 2 so the short press does not seem delay too much.
I have taken a look at the code myself but have not found anything obvious in the coding to fix the DKP issue.
_________________
Nils
Files Section
Diagnosis File Section |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawn_s
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nils,
Thanks for the very fast reply. I will leave my commands the way they are and try changing everything from DKP to LKP as you recommended (with the extra low duration). I have to say - as someone who didn't know anything about this whole JP1 community 2 weeks ago, it is amazing the amount of information, tools, and help that is out there for this. It has really become an obsession of myself and a friend I accidentally got hooked too!! Our wives don't share the same enthusiasm!! Thanks again for your suggestions.
Shawn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nils_Ekberg
Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 1689
Location: Near Albany, NY
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mtakahar
Expert
Joined: 03 Aug 2003
Posts: 281
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nils,
Does the 8910 extender has the LDKP v1.3?
Older one had a problem with recognizing a single press correctly.
Hal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nils_Ekberg
Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 1689
Location: Near Albany, NY
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hal
It looks like it is with just one difference the is a "LD R_Closures, 1" in the 8910 that is not in 1.3
I don't think there are many of the extenders that have been updated to the 1.3 of LDKP
_________________
Nils
Files Section
Diagnosis File Section |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElizabethD
Advanced Member
Joined: 09 Feb 2004
Posts: 2348
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 4:40 pm Post subject: Re: Sluggish/Unpredictable Results on 8910 Arrow Keys Using |
|
|
| shawn_s wrote: | | But now in addition to the normal single key presses being very slow to react (too much wait time before the guide actually received the arrow command), I find the buttons sometimes don't even work. Sometimes I need to hold the button down (remember, this was a DKP, not a LKP) for a second or two before the cable box processes the command. |
Which 8910 do you use - 8910B00 (donut ring for arrows) or B02(real arrows)? The B00 version migh not be responding, and I'd attribute it to the bad design of contacts or something. That dounut might be a bit rough to press twice quickly.
| shawn_s wrote: | ...if I've pressed the CBL button on my remote before pressing these keys, won't the DEV_CBL's be redundant and unnecessary?
CBL; Down; DKP(1); SKP: DEV_CBL, Shift-Down; DKP: DEV_CBL, Phantom 3 |
Nils will know for sure if you must. I don't put DEV_x in this situation. I may well be wrong not doing so.
| Nils_Ekberg wrote: | | Not many people are using the DKP function and have switched to the LKP option |
Just to mess up your user statistics  , Nils, several weeks ago I switched to DKP. Like it better. But, relating to this post - I haven't used DKP on the arrow keys, just power and device keys. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawn_s
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:37 pm Post subject: Re: Sluggish/Unpredictable Results on 8910 Arrow Keys Using |
|
|
| ElizabethD wrote: | | Which 8910 do you use - 8910B00 (donut ring for arrows) or B02(real arrows)? The B00 version migh not be responding, and I'd attribute it to the bad design of contacts or something. That dounut might be a bit rough to press twice quickly. |
I believe I have the B02; I got mine at BestBuy and the picture shows the arrows all being a part of a continuous ring surrounding the Select button. Mine has the arrow buttons not connected to one another - is that the B02? The double-clicking felt pretty natural; I think I would have preferred DPK over LKP for some of these functions, but at lunchtime I tried LKP and the arrows behaved a lot better.
| ElizabethD wrote: | | Nils will know for sure if you must. I don't put DEV_x in this situation. I may well be wrong not doing so. |
I believe it should work either way. I just did that out of desperation because I was having problems. I think I'll remove all of the DEV_x's for simplicity sake.
| ElizabethD wrote: | | Just to mess up your user statistics , Nils, several weeks ago I switched to DKP. Like it better. But, relating to this post - I haven't used DKP on the arrow keys, just power and device keys. |
I too prefer the DKP - feels more like a mousing event. The LKP doesn't yet feel as natural, but I'll get used to it if the remote performs better. Thanks for all of your help. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawn_s
Joined: 15 Feb 2005
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nils_Ekberg wrote: | Hal
It looks like it is with just one difference the is a "LD R_Closures, 1" in the 8910 that is not in 1.3
I don't think there are many of the extenders that have been updated to the 1.3 of LDKP |
Nils, are you indicating there might be an update for the 8910 extender? I picked up the latest RDFs from the "RDF's for IR and RM version 1.18b" zip file (dated 1/14/2005) - that's the latest and greatest, right? Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nils_Ekberg
Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 1689
Location: Near Albany, NY
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yup the RDF's are the latest. I will be putting out new RDF's in a week or so but nothing significant, just some cleanup.
I have to look closer at the 8910 extender and see if the one thing I was mentioning to Hal is significant or not but the version of LDKP you have is just about as close as you can get to the right version.
I will keep you posted.
_________________
Nils
Files Section
Diagnosis File Section |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElizabethD
Advanced Member
Joined: 09 Feb 2004
Posts: 2348
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:42 pm Post subject: Re: Sluggish/Unpredictable Results on 8910 Arrow Keys Using |
|
|
| shawn_s wrote: | | I believe I have the B02; ... Mine has the arrow buttons not connected to one another - is that the B02? |
Yup, B02 is the arrows type.
Out of curiosity, I just did some experiments on both types.
Ring style-I can't get DKP to send everything out, looks like incomplete sequences are sent and besides I find it very rough to do DKP on that ring. LKP is easier to do, but also incomplete macros are send. It sort of makes no sense. But I think it's issue of physics not jp1.
Arrows style, B02 -  -no problems on my remote either way, LKP or DKP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mtakahar
Expert
Joined: 03 Aug 2003
Posts: 281
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nils_Ekberg wrote: | | I have to look closer at the 8910 extender and see if the one thing I was mentioning to Hal is significant or not but the version of LDKP you have is just about as close as you can get to the right version. |
Now I remember that David made the R_Closures change to make LKP work when you put it in the middle of a macro. (I posted one patched with similar change some time ago, but the guy asked for it never reported back.)
I'm not absolutely sure, but it looks to me that it would make DKP a bit unreliable.
Hal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nils_Ekberg
Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 1689
Location: Near Albany, NY
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mtakahar wrote: | I'm not absolutely sure, but it looks to me that it would make DKP a bit unreliable.
Hal |
I agree Hal. It would seem like the R_Closures would make the protocol think it was always a single press.
Funny part is all of my remotes are set up the same way with the LKP as the 2nd command in the device macros. This is on a variety of remotes some of which that don't have the R_Closures in them and they all work on LKP. I will have to experiment with DKP again and see what works best.
_________________
Nils
Files Section
Diagnosis File Section |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ElizabethD
Advanced Member
Joined: 09 Feb 2004
Posts: 2348
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nils_Ekberg wrote: | | I agree Hal. It would seem like the R_Closures would make the protocol think it was always a single press. |
Extender considers DEV_xxx as a key, right? Does the remote?
This R_Closures thing sounds like a signal telling the remote there's been 1 press before you wait for the second/long, is that the idea?
Just trying to understand what you're discussing, knowing full well it's over my head.
BTW I wrote earlier that I have no problem with LKP/DKP. That overstated the case a bit. Initially, I did have problems, but I think it had to do with timing and/or some badly coded toad togs running in the long section. I don't know if this makes any sense. One reason I abandoned LKP if favour of DKP was that held too long, the whole darn thing would repeat. Honest. I saw on the LCD how it just was traversing all the devices coded within, again and again. I haven't found a way to prevent the repeat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnsfine
Site Admin
Joined: 10 Aug 2003
Posts: 4766
Location: Bedford, MA
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2005 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ElizabethD wrote: |
Extender considers DEV_xxx as a key, right? Does the remote? |
I don't think that's a meaningful question. But a partial answer is that the extender does NOT pass the DEV_xxx keycode through the ROM routines that process ordinary keycodes.
| ElizabethD wrote: |
This R_Closures thing sounds like a signal telling the remote there's been 1 press before you wait for the second/long, is that the idea? |
I haven't looked at this particular extender nor at LKP. But I think an explanation of what a generic extender does with R_Closures may help:
1) The built-in routines automatically add delay whenever they do anything while a macro is executing. Since we don't want that delay, the extender never tells the built-in routines that a macro is executing. The extender knows about and processes the macro but the internal routines think they're executing just the current keystroke.
2) When the built-in routines don't know they're executing from a macro, they streach out the duration of the current signal until the key is released. Without some trick, this would mean the first signal of any extender macro would be streached until the user releases the macro key.
3) The trick is to put an intentionally wrong value in the R_Closures register so that the built-in routines always think the last key has been released whether it has or not.
4) But sometimes you need the internal routines to correctly know whether the last key was released or not. Then you need to put the correct value (1) back into R_Closures so the internal routines once again can tell whether the key is still pressed.
I haven't looked through LKP, but it seems it's R_Closures processing could get tricky. It needs R_Closures to be right (equal 1) when it checks whether the key is still pressed (in order to decide whether the press is long or short) but it needs R_Closures to be wrong (not equal 1) when it dispatches other keycodes in order to make those other keycodes run at extender fast macro speeds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
File Section
Wiki
