multiplexer | sending ETH or ERC20 to multiple addresses | Blockchain library
kandi X-RAY | multiplexer Summary
kandi X-RAY | multiplexer Summary
See /build/contracts/Multiplexer.json for deployment details.
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of multiplexer
multiplexer Key Features
multiplexer Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on multiplexer
QUESTION
I'm working on a question on CPU Datapaths for 5-stage RISC and I think I'm misunderstanding how load instructions are handled. Given this datapath:
Where MUX1 takes NPC or Src1 Register Data as input, MUX2 takes Src2 Register Data or an immediate value as input, MUX3 takes NPC or the output of the ALU (and sometimes the zero flag for branching) as input, and MUX4 takes ALU output or Memory Data as input.
We are asked to give the inputs to each multiplexer for the instruction "mov R0, [R1 + 1000]" (Where instructions are of the form "op, dest, src1, src2"). I'm pretty sure that for this instruction R0 would be src1, R1 would be src2 and 1000 would be an immediate value, but I'm lost as to how these should be handled in the execution and memory access stages in order to compute the correct result.
Any help would be appreciated! Sorry if this question was convoluted.
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Mar-14 at 22:31Given the various mismatches in the question, let's look at some scenarios.
First, that mov R0, [R1+1000] loads from effective address R1+1000, and targets R0.
This is both possible and likely, since RISC V, like MIPS (and Intel syntax in x86) specifies the target as the first operand, as you have mentioned with "op dest, src1, src2").
The load instructions are I-Type instructions and have rs1, rd, and imm as instruction fields. Load instructions have one register source, one immediate source and one register target (the one to take on the result read from memory).
MUX1 would choose between NPC (of unknown value in this scenario) and the value coming from register rs1, here R1 (also of unknown value in this scenario). Control signals will cause it to choose rs1, so the value from R1 is MUX1's output.
MUX2 would choose between rs2 and the immediate. There is no rs2 field in an I-Type instruction, but the hardware will still interpret bits 20-24 as a register number and look up that register's value to feed to one of MUX2's inputs. The other input will come from the sign extended immediate, 1000. Obviously, control signals will cause it to choose the immediate over the erroneous rs2 value.
(If we want to, we can determine the register number for rs2 by inspecting the instruction's bits. In this instruction, those bits 20-24 would be from the immediate field, but those bits are still there. At this early point in instruction decode, the hardware doesn't actually know what kind of instruction it is, so it does this rs2 lookup in parallel just in case it is one of the type of instructions that does use the rs2 field. The control signals will tell the succeeding ALU/EX stage to ignore this speculatively performed lookup.)
MUX3 will be given three different inputs, one is NPC, the other is ALU output, which is R1+1000, and the other is another register value. Control signals will tell MUX3 to choose the NPC value (the others are erroneous).
MUX4 will be given the value read from memory at R1 + 1000 and R1 + 1000 itself as ALU output. Control signals will tell MUX4 to choose the value read from memory.
Second, it could be that mov R0, [R1+1000] is a store instruction. The value being stored comes from R0 and it is stored at address R1 + 1000.
Store instructions are S-Type and have rs1, rs2, and imm instruction fields. Store instructions have two register sources and one immediate — there is no register target.
Either way, MUX1, MUX2, and MUX3 operate the same as with the first scenario, since the store instructions, like load instructions, also compute an effective address for memory operation from rs1 + imm, here, R1 + 1000.
MUX4 will be given a choice between some garbage on the memory output (there was no read operation so the output of memory is junk) or the ALU output R1 + 1000. It doesn't matter what is chosen, since reg write is false and no writeback will happen anyway (it is a store, not a load — the write in a store is into memory not into register).
QUESTION
I'm trying to do a circuit consisting of a 2 to 1 multiplexer (8-bit buses), an 8-bit register and an 8-bit adder. These components are all tested and work as expected.
The thing is: if I try to send the output of the Adder to one of the inputs of the multiplexer (as seen in the image by the discontinued line), the simulation will stop rather suddenly. If I don't do that and just let ain do its thing, everything will run just as it should, but I do need the output of the adder to be the one inputted to the multiplexer.
The simulation is the following:
The code is:
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Feb-07 at 21:10Constructing a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example requires filling in the missing components:
QUESTION
I'm testing a simple project deployment, but after deploying it, the project has this error.I'm testing a simple project deployment, but I'm getting errors like the following in StackExchange.Redis when running.
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Feb-03 at 02:03The error you get usually indicates that you didn't set abortConnect=false in the connection string.
The default value of abortConnect is true, which makes StackExchange.Redis not automatically reconnect to the server in some cases.
It is recommended that you set abortConnect=false in your connection string.
In addition, because StackExchange.Redis uses a single thread, if a request takes too long, subsequent requests will be blocked, increasing the request timeout limit.
You can try to use csredis to replace the driver：
QUESTION
since now I've been reading Stackoverflow for a long time and I've learned a lot.
But now I have a problem, I couldn't find on Stackoverflow, even it should be kind of a "standard" question. So please forgive me if this topic has been answered already.
Problem:
I'am writing a module with defined interfaces for input and output structures. It should be some kind of a "multiplexer" with maybe three inputs and one output. The module should switch one of the inputs to the output (depending on some logic).
A working example is shown here:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Dec-07 at 20:15Is it possible to avoid copying the structures from one to another without changing my interface?
By "the existing interface", I take you to mean that you have code that consumes objects of this type ...
QUESTION
I am using an interrupt to turn a flag to True when data is ready from an external ADC. This interrupt is being triggered, however when I add:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Dec-05 at 01:17MCP3464::MCP3464()
{
ch = 0;
attachInterrupt(digitalPinToInterrupt(dataReadyPin), dataReadyInterrupt, RISING);
}
QUESTION
Well, my task is to create a n(n is a multiple of 4) bit cla (carry lookahead adder) using 4 bit cla and multiplexers. Specifically, I have to implement the following:
The part that is in brackets has to be repeated as many times as need for the parameter n that is given. My Question is: how should I define the wires r,t and c? At first I thought the following:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Nov-28 at 17:31Try this.
QUESTION
I'm using Blazor WebAssembly with .NET 5 and I have a MultipleCameraLive component which embeds 4 SingleCameraLive components. Each component represents the streaming of frames coming from a given camera. By clicking on the frame belonging to a given camera, the user will jump to a page (let's call it SingleCameraFocus) where only the streaming from that camera is showed.
Images are sent by the server by means of SignalR as soon as they are acquired from the cameras (server-initiated communication).
Now, for modularity reasons I think the best approach would be to have a single Hub class and have like "multiple instances" of it. In other words in the server I'd have something like this
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Sep-17 at 14:23Here is a sample:
QUESTION
Im trying to implement a simple node.js stream multiplexer/demultiplexer.
Currently while implementing the multiplexing mechanism i noticed that the output of the multiplexer gets concatenated into a single chunk.
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jul-23 at 10:26Use the data event and read from the callback:
The 'data' event is emitted whenever the stream is relinquishing ownership of a chunk of data to a consumer.
QUESTION
I've been trying to mount an SD card, write some data to some files, then dismount the SD card. Mount a separate one and write to more files (This is done via a multiplexer and two separate but identical SD card modules). I am using an STM32F3 and an SPI interface, I can mount and write to files without issue but I am struggling to properly deinitialise all of FatFs variables between SD cards.
I am taking the following steps
Using f_close to close all open files. Dismounting the drive by mounting a NULL drive f_mount(0, "", 0);. I then call FATFS_UnLinkDriver. My main issue appears to be that after all these steps disk.is_initilized still returns 1.
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jul-01 at 19:42The media access interface where disk_initialise() is defined did not envisage perhaps you physically changing the hardware interface. disk.is_initialized[pdrv] is there only to block unnecessary reinitialization of the hardware, and is a one way switch.
You can force reinitialisation simply by resetting disk.is_initialized[pdrv] to 0:
QUESTION
I'm trying to write a code in vhdl to create a 16 to 1 mux using 2 to 1 mux. I actually thought that to do this we may need 15 two to one multiplexers and by wiring them together and using structural model I wrote the code below. First I wrote a 2 to 1 mux:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jun-06 at 23:54Virtual component binding using component declarations can either be explicit using a configuration specification to supply a binding indication, or rely on a default binding indication.
A default binding indication would rely on finding an entity declared in a reference library whose name matches the component name. That's not the case here, your entity is named MUX_2_1 (case insensitive) while the component name is mux2to1.
It's not illegal to have components unbound in VHDL, it's the equivalent of not loading a component in a particular location in a printed circuit or bread board, it simply produces no output which shows in simulation here as a 'U'.
Here the solutions could be to either change the name of the entity in both the entity declaration and it's architecture from MUX_2_1 to mux2to1, change the component declaration to MUX_2_1 or provide a configuration specification providing an explicit binding indication as a block declarative item in the architecture for mux16to1 of the form
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install multiplexer
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page
