Hi, I started this thread a month or so ago and wanted to give you an
update. A couple weeks ago I updated my BIOS on my Intel D525
motherboard - it was about 3-4 revs behind. I did it to fix a shut
down problem I was having. At the same time I turned off S.M.A.R.T.
monitoring as I have a SSD a
the newer grub is quite different from the older
On my 10.04 I had to edit the /etc/default/grubfile to look like this
#ORIGINAL LINE WAS
>GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="quiet splash"
to
>GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT="quiet splash isolcpus=1"
and then run >sudo update-grub
the kernel now boots w
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 12:48:10 +0100, you wrote:
> From the EMC Wiki:
>
>> Edit */boot/grub/menu.lst* and add *isolcpus* parameter to the end of
>> the kernel line of the RTAI kernel.
>> The value of the *isolcpus* parameter will be the number of the last
>> core/CPU. Start to count from #0.
>> 1
From the EMC Wiki:
> Edit */boot/grub/menu.lst* and add *isolcpus* parameter to the end of
> the kernel line of the RTAI kernel.
> The value of the *isolcpus* parameter will be the number of the last
> core/CPU. Start to count from #0.
> 1 for dual core/CPU system, 3 for quad core/CPU etc...
>
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 21:06:59 -0400, you wrote:
>I had this problem on my mill that has a D510 board in it. I have not had the
>error pop up since disabling hyper threading in bios and adding isolcpus to
>the boot file. FWIW...
Which boot file?
Steve Blackmore
--
Stephen Wille Padnos wrote:
>
> Sure, maybe the message could be changed to "Unexpectedly high jitter in
> realtime thread", but I don't know if that makes any more sense to anyone.
>
What REALLY matters, is that the system is not running dangerously close
to running out of "headroom",
where t
Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Ok, found something interesting. I left the isolcpus=1 in grub and
> re-enabled hyper-threading and latency topped out around 11.2us with
> acceptable performance. I thought it should be fixed so ran EMC2 and
> after a few hours the error tripped again. Here is the details f
Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Ok, found something interesting. I left the isolcpus=1 in grub and
> re-enabled hyper-threading and latency topped out around 11.2us with
> acceptable performance. I thought it should be fixed so ran EMC2 and
> after a few hours the error tripped again. Here is the details f
Ok, found something interesting. I left the isolcpus=1 in grub and
re-enabled hyper-threading and latency topped out around 11.2us with
acceptable performance. I thought it should be fixed so ran EMC2 and
after a few hours the error tripped again. Here is the details from
dmesg:
[16870.928322]
Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> I think you meant to say 20% not 120% since you gave the example of
> 200ms jitter will trip the error with a 1ms servo thread.
> I had a chance to do some further testing. I ran the latency test for
> longer - a couple hours and the servo thread jitter just barely
Hi Peter,
I think you meant to say 20% not 120% since you gave the example of
200ms jitter will trip the error with a 1ms servo thread.
I had a chance to do some further testing. I ran the latency test for
longer - a couple hours and the servo thread jitter just barely
exceeded 14us which is exact
On 03/23/2011 12:52 PM, Fred Kehler wrote:
> great list!
> I have had this error popping up all the time since I upgraded to the 10.04
> distribution ( seldom on the 8.04, same computer)
>
> and the isolcpu=1 seems to have solved it...
>
> does it follow then that the second cpu in this case is not
great list!
I have had this error popping up all the time since I upgraded to the 10.04
distribution ( seldom on the 8.04, same computer)
and the isolcpu=1 seems to have solved it...
does it follow then that the second cpu in this case is not being managed by
the realtime kernel?
I am currently
I had this problem on my mill that has a D510 board in it. I have not had the
error pop up since disabling hyper threading in bios and adding isolcpus to the
boot file. FWIW...
-Tom
On Mar 15, 2011, at 3:22 PM, Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Hi,
> Is there any way to adjust the sensitivity or suppress
Thanks for the suggestions!
Running the latency test program seemed to top out around 15us which I
was quite pleased with but never ran the test more than 10 min or so.
I have bios power management and screen saver disabled. Just read
about the SMI thing in the wiki and I would like to do some te
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, Joel Jacobs wrote:
> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:22:04 -0400
> From: Joel Jacobs
> Reply-To: "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)"
>
> To: emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Emc-users] unexpected realtime delay
>
> Hi,
> Is th
You can start with:
1) disabling the hyperthreading and
2) dedicating one of Atom's cores to EMC (and other RTAI functions) by
adding "isolcpus=1" to grub
Unfortunately I cannot explain in more detail, how exactly to do it,
so I can only advice asking uncle google.
Viesturs
2011/3/15 Joel Jacobs
Hi,
Is there any way to adjust the sensitivity or suppress this error? I
have an Atom D525 running the latest EMC2 from the repositories
(Ubuntu 10.04). I have a Mesa 7I43 and Gecko 320 servo drives. I
have no base thread at all, just the servo thread running at 700us. At
1ms I would get random
Hi all
I have been running a couple of jobs successfully with my new shiny dustproof
box. Now I get "Unexpected realtime delay".
this is what I find in dmesg:
[28364.306133] 19757763: ERROR: Unexpected realtime delay: check dmesg for
details.
[28364.306161]
[28364.306163] In recent history the
Hi,
If I run the RTAI latency test
lat min, ovl min, lat max, ovl max and overruns all look like the
table in the wiki.
However, lat avg is about -450 which doesn't make sense.
The mainboard is a Biostar with a 733 MHz P3. Should be something
like the board in Roland's Mazak.
Controller b
On Sun, 2007-04-29 at 21:05 +0800, 杜少华 wrote:
> Every time I start the emc2,it reports that unexpected time delay.
I has this problem as well & fixed it by replacing the video card.
The system was a 400MHz P2 on an Intel Seattle2 motherboard with an AGP
bus S3 VGA card. I replaced the S3 card wi
Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> Gentlemen,
> I have started getting this message also. I start EMC and as soon
> as I move an axis I get this message. I haven't tried to troubleshoot
> this but if someone would like me to try or look at something on my
> machine, I will.
> thanks
There should be a m
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 11:26:29AM -0500, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
> Gentlemen,
> I have started getting this message also. I start EMC and as soon
> as I move an axis I get this message. I haven't tried to troubleshoot
> this but if someone would like me to try or look at something on my
> mach
Gentlemen,
I have started getting this message also. I start EMC and as soon
as I move an axis I get this message. I haven't tried to troubleshoot
this but if someone would like me to try or look at something on my
machine, I will.
thanks
Stuart
杜少华 wrote:
> I made a module named Mlink under HAL,It uses the IRQ 10 and cycle time
> is 1 ms.
> Every time I start the emc2,it reports that unexpected time delay.
> I don't know why it happened?And does it influnce the realtime thread of
> emc2?
>
HAL uses periodic threads, not interrupts.
I made a module named Mlink under HAL,It uses the IRQ 10 and cycle time is 1 ms.
Every time I start the emc2,it reports that unexpected time delay.
I don't know why it happened?And does it influnce the realtime thread of emc2?
Jack Ensor wrote:
>oh -oh something else messed up now. Thought I would run the latency test again
>before I did what you suggested and look what happened.
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/$ sudo mkdir /dev/rtf; sudo mknod /dev/rtf/3 c 150 3;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/$ sudo mknod /devrtf3 c 150 3;
>
>
Is this a
Looks like -n didn't get what you may need so I also did -v
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ lspci -n
:00:00.0 0600: 8086:2530 (rev 04)
:00:01.0 0604: 8086:2532 (rev 04)
:00:1e.0 0604: 8086:244e (rev 04)
:00:1f.0 0601: 8086:2440 (rev 04)
:00:1f.1 0101: 8086:244b (rev 04)
:00:1f.2 0c03:
oh -oh something else messed up now. Thought I would run the latency test again
before I did what you suggested and look what happened.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/$ sudo mkdir /dev/rtf; sudo mknod /dev/rtf/3 c 150 3;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/$ sudo mknod /devrtf3 c 150 3;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/$ cd /usr/realtime*/
Hi Jack,
you were pretty close :)
You need to load the modified module (sudo modprobe rtai_smi)
and then run the latency test again.
If that works you will need to change the /etc/emc2/rtapi.conf and add
rtai_smi to the list of modules to load for RTAI3 (in the line with
adeos, rtai_* & co)
Rega
My PC uses an Intel motherboard running at 1.5Ghz and 256mb of ram doesn't like
EMC2 apparently because of excessive overruns.
Looking at http://wiki.linuxcnc.org/cgi-bin/emcinfo.pl?TroubleShooting
it tells me to look for:
ubuntu:$ ls -l /dev/rt*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 2006-05-23 23:34 /dev/
Perhaps it helps to know what 'rmmod' does:
$ man rmmod
rmmod(8)
NAME
rmmod — simple program to remove a module from the Linux Kernel
[... much more information snipped ...]
Jeff
-
Take Surveys. Ea
Jack Ensor wrote:
>The odd time stamp was due to me rebooting the PC. There is no
>cut'n'paste error. I t is exactly as it appeared. The big question on
>your response - You said (sse below) :
> "Before running emc, try `sudo rmmod pcspkr` - That particular module
>is known to cause problems w
The odd time stamp was due to me rebooting the PC. There is no
cut'n'paste error. I t is exactly as it appeared. The big question on
your response - You said (sse below) :
"Before running emc, try `sudo rmmod pcspkr` - That particular module
is known to cause problems with some hardware/config
34 matches
Mail list logo
