On Sat, 2010-09-25 at 19:27 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have been working on omap3 performances, and during this, I noticed
> > one flaw in /proc/xenomai/latency: it displays the whole timer subsystem
> > anticipation whereas it should probab
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Fine with me. The nucleus should always know better regarding the timer
> setup latency, so leaving it untouched by the /proc knob makes sense.
>
Ok. My concern was about user settings, but guaranteeing an ABI never
meant we had to maintain the latency over Xenomai revisio
On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 14:37 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > Fine with me. The nucleus should always know better regarding the timer
> > setup latency, so leaving it untouched by the /proc knob makes sense.
> >
>
> Ok. My concern was about user settings, but guarante
The Blackfin assembly for making syscalls is inefficient, so rewrite it
to use the asm constraints that gcc provides to load values into specific
registers. The generated assembly now looks much nicer, and the header
no longer duplicates the same syscall assembly multiple times.
Signed-off-by: Mi
