[sdiy] Non maximal-length LFSR

Richie Burnett rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk
Fri Mar 4 20:26:59 CET 2016

How is this done Dave?  Do you have a reference?


-----Original Message----- 
From: Dave Manley
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 7:07 PM
To: Richie Burnett ; Tom Wiltshire
Cc: synth-diy DIY
Subject: Re: [sdiy] Non maximal-length LFSR

It hasn't been mentioned, but the LFSR implementation can be done so that it 
generates multiple bits per update, not just a single bit.  This is commonly 
done in telecom/ networking descramblers which operate on a multi-bit serdes 


On March 4, 2016 5:24:02 AM PST, Richie Burnett 
<rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk> wrote:
>Yeah, but throwing away every 49th result would be throwing away 7
>worth! ;-))  Could I live with that!?!?
>Thanks for everyone's help and suggestions about this.  I'm confident I
>the way forward now, and also have some good pointers towards working
>through the maths to back up my decisions, which always makes me feel
>-----Original Message----- 
>From: Tom Wiltshire
>Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 12:17 PM
>To: Richie Burnett
>Cc: mskala at ansuz.sooke.bc.ca ; synth-diy DIY
>Subject: Re: [sdiy] Non maximal-length LFSR
>371 years!!
>On 4 Mar 2016, at 11:34, Richie Burnett <rburnett at richieburnett.co.uk>
>> Sure the resulting sequence will be a smidgen shorter, but 2^49-1 is
>> long anyway.
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2016.0.7442 / Virus Database: 4537/11745 - Release Date:
>Synth-diy mailing list
>Synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7442 / Virus Database: 4537/11746 - Release Date: 03/04/16 

More information about the Synth-diy mailing list