[Xenomai-core] Error propagating ISR to Linux domain

Hi, I've encountered a little problem when trying to propagate an ISR from Xenomai to Linux context. To sum up clearly, I'm writing an RT kernel module that drives a PCI card. I've registered a nucleus ISR handler on the IRQ attributed to this card. On some systems, this IRQ is dedicated to

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PowerPC] Registers Corruption at Context Switch

Philippe Gerum a écrit : FYI, I'm running on PowerPC 603e core with Linux 2.6.23, Adeos 2.0-09 (latest) and Xenomai 2.3.4 (latest). read Xenomai 2.4.4 here, of course ... See arch/powerpc/switch_32.S, rthal_switch_threads(), for the part that does the actual stack switching. Note

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PowerPC] Registers Corruption at Context Switch

Philippe Gerum a écrit : See arch/powerpc/switch_32.S, rthal_switch_threads(), for the part that does the actual stack switching. Note that this code is obfuscated by the fact that we have to handle so-called hybrid switching, between Xenomai kernel threads (which do not rely on a

[Xenomai-core] [PowerPC] Registers Corruption at Context Switch

Hi, I'm facing a problem with the PowerPC version of Xenomai/Adeos that I have difficulties to identify the exact source. I'm running a Xenomai RT kernel thread that use to crash sometimes due to potential register corruption. Problem occurs after a context switch and, in some cases, if the

[Xenomai-core] RTAI Skin FIFO handler running as non-RT task

Hi, I've been playing with the RTAI skin as I wanted a FIFO implementation close to the one that used to exist in RTLinux. I've setup an input handler to the FIFO, and this handler is trying to acquire some Xenomai RT mutex that was previously (successfully) created by an RT task. Acquisition

Re: [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP

Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit : On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Benjamin ZORES [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why not x86_64 ? Cause I don't need 64 bits. Have you run the latency test to know if you have no hardware issue ? Do you have a quick way to start this test ? Regards, Ben

Re: [Xenomai-core] Adeos PowerPC patch differences

Philippe Gerum wrote: Yes. I have tested 2.6.22-DENX over two Freescale boards, namely mpc52xx and mpc8548, using this very same setup. Btw, you will need to pick 2.0-01 which landed today in the repo, since I fixed a couple of issues (one being serious) there. Thanks for the info about

Re: [Xenomai-core] Adeos PowerPC patch differences

Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Benjamin ZORES wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Yes. I have tested 2.6.22-DENX over two Freescale boards, namely mpc52xx and mpc8548, using this very same setup. Btw, you will need to pick 2.0-01 which landed today in the repo, since I fixed a couple of issues (one

Re: [Xenomai-core] Adeos PowerPC patch differences

Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Benjamin ZORES wrote: Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: Benjamin ZORES wrote: Philippe Gerum wrote: Yes. I have tested 2.6.22-DENX over two Freescale boards, namely mpc52xx and mpc8548, using this very same setup. Btw, you will need to pick 2.0-01 which landed today

Re: [Xenomai-core] Adeos PowerPC port over 2.6.21

Philippe Gerum wrote: Benjamin, On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 14:03 +0200, Benjamin ZORES wrote: Benjamin ZORES wrote: Benjamin ZORES wrote: Hi, I've seen that Adeos has been officially ported to PowerPC architecture. Please find an update of the adeos-ipipe-2.6.20-powerpc-1.6

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH] ADEOS IPIPE PPC patches upgrade

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:12:54 +0100 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hallo, attached is patch for Xenomai upgrading the ADEOS IPIPE patches for the PPC tree. Here is the ChangeLog entry: 2006-12-18 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] *

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH] Adeos support for 2.6.18 merged PowerPC architecture.

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 11:17:07 +0100 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have now a preliminary patch for adeos-ipipe-2.6.19-ppc-1.5-00. The porting was rather straight-forward, as the ppc tree does not use the new genirq interface, in contrast to the powerpc tree (that's what you

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH] Adeos support for 2.6.18 merged PowerPC architecture.

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 14:09:38 +0100 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately, generic applies only to the Linux part. I realized, that the new IPIPE support for the genirqs requires even more arch-specific modifications than the old interface :-( on PowerPC. That's pretty

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH] Adeos support for 2.6.18 merged PowerPC architecture.

On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 13:11:23 +0100 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Benjamin Zores wrote: On Mon, 27 Nov 2006 12:21:25 +0100 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I hack a bit my patch to make it compile and the kernel already booted. Though it hangs when

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH] Adeos support for 2.6.18 merged PowerPC architecture.

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:10:17 +0100 Wolfgang Grandegger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - NR_IRQS is not defined. This is a problem with the include weirdness due to radix-tree.h, IIRC. It is set to 512 for all PowerPC archs, puh, that's overkill (but not our problem for the time being). Indeed it

[Xenomai-core] [PATCH] Adeos support for 2.6.18 merged PowerPC architecture.

Hi, I've downloaded latest Adeos/Ipipe patch for PPC and unfortunately this latest doesn't (yet) support the ARCH=powerpc architecture from kernel but only the PPC one. I've tried porting the changes to support the PPC_MERGE and be able to still use Xenomai on 2.6.18 with ARCH=powerpc.