Jim Cromie wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
...
So, how to proceed?
aside wiki++ /
1 file at a time - I suppose..
I'll start by poaching Hannes' Makefile, bundling it into an examples/
dir with
my 3-way version of his timer programs. Id like see the target files
appear as 0 len files,
(
Hi all,
the current representation of timeouts and timestamps in RTDM device
profiles is inconsistent. In the serial profile we use [u]int64_t
directly, the CAN profile defines its own types called
nanosecs_{abs|rel}_t (though they just wrap the int64 ones).
What is the idea of nanosecs? Having
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
the current representation of timeouts and timestamps in RTDM device
profiles is inconsistent.
I would welcome a consistent time value representation above all RTDM
profiles, too.
In the serial profile we use [u]int64_t
directly, the CAN
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
The possibility of redefinition was not the main goal here. As you
mentioned it would be problematic. No, I introduced nanosecs_abs_t and
nanosecs_rel_t because they are more intuitive and more speaking to the
programmer. The meaning of a
I just wanted to drop a note that I did some refactoring on the
drivers directory (16550A-serial) and the config menus. If anything is
broken, shoot me.
I don't think this is related, but 2 students of mine got stuck on a linker
error this morning trying to compile xenomai-trunk on a i386
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
The possibility of redefinition was not the main goal here. As you
mentioned it would be problematic. No, I introduced nanosecs_abs_t and
nanosecs_rel_t because they are more intuitive and more speaking to the
programmer.
Klaas Gadeyne wrote:
I just wanted to drop a note that I did some refactoring on the
drivers directory (16550A-serial) and the config menus. If anything is
broken, shoot me.
I don't think this is related, but 2 students of mine got stuck on a linker
error this morning trying to compile
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
A simple patch, just like suggested by Gilles, to avoid looping over
periodic xntimer handlers in case of overruns.
It saves the current TSC on loop entry and uses this
Jan Kiszka wrote:
I am thinking again about this patch: some handlers need to be
rewritten, for example the posix timers handler, because the handler
relies on the fact that it is called for every timer expiry to compute
the overruns count. So maybe this patch should come with the
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
The possibility of redefinition was not the main goal here. As you
mentioned it would be problematic. No, I introduced nanosecs_abs_t and
nanosecs_rel_t because they are more intuitive and more
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
The possibility of redefinition was not the main goal here. As you
mentioned it would be problematic. No, I introduced nanosecs_abs_t and
nanosecs_rel_t because they are more
11 matches
Mail list logo
