Lars Segerlund wrote:
>  Ok, I will check how the latency in device drivers are, perhaps they
> are not so bad, atleast for x86 , I was thinking arm .... someone was
> mentioning they had to do some copying on interrupts ( ie, context
> switches ... ).
>  Lets investigate, it's no worse than a scope to the parport and
> setting one pin with outb and another with a driver.
>   
I've already done this in user mode on the Beagle Board.  You can't 
change the state
of a GPIO pin faster than 240 ns.  Apparently the GPIO hardware is 
multiplexed, and
the hardware scans each GPIO bank every 240 ns.  It appears the CPU goes 
into a
wait state until the GPIO performs the action requested.  Somebody on 
the Beagle
list claims a device driver is much faster, but I have doubts he 
measured it right.

On x86 hardware, motherboard parports are pretty slow, so you can't flip a
parport bit much faster than 500 ns or so.  But, it would be fine for 
testing
interrupt latency and jitter.

Jon

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to