Philippe Gerum wrote: >>> Ok, you were talking about the _previous_ implementation, right? >> Yes. It's been running for a few hours today, so your fix seems to be >> fine; in any case, the tests will run overnight, and I'll let you know >> tomorrow. I believe this issue could not be easily pointed out by just >> a simple latency check. >> > > Agreed, we need to create a load that makes races on seqlocks more likely, and > ideally with lots of readers delaying a single writer.
The testing of your fix ran overnight without problems, so we'd consider it fine. Another possible fix to preserve linux timings is to use local_irq_disable_hw() after halt. It seems to create no significant latency. Sincerely, p. _______________________________________________ Adeos-main mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/adeos-main
