Jan Kiszka wrote:
Petr Cervenka wrote:
I ran a test during last weekend (and nothing wrong happened). But the
/proc/xenomai/stat output is strange. Probably some type cast error, because
18446744071739514846 = 0x8A939FDE and the appropriate value perhaps
should be
Jan Kiszka wrote:
/proc/xenomai/stat output is strange. Probably some type cast error,
because 18446744071739514846 = 0x8A939FDE and the appropriate
value perhaps should be 0x8A939FDE = 2324930526.
[...]
Reminds me that other pending patch for /proc/xenomai/faults:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
Petr Cervenka wrote:
I ran a test during last weekend (and nothing wrong happened). But the
/proc/xenomai/stat output is strange. Probably some type cast error,
because 18446744071739514846 = 0x8A939FDE and the appropriate value
perhaps should
Fillod Stephane wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
/proc/xenomai/stat output is strange. Probably some type cast error,
because 18446744071739514846 = 0x8A939FDE and the appropriate
value perhaps should be 0x8A939FDE = 2324930526.
[...]
Reminds me that other pending patch for
Fillod Stephane wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
/proc/xenomai/stat output is strange. Probably some type cast error,
because 18446744071739514846 = 0x8A939FDE and the appropriate
value perhaps should be 0x8A939FDE = 2324930526.
[...]
Reminds me that other pending patch for
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
Fillod Stephane wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
/proc/xenomai/stat output is strange. Probably some type cast error,
because 18446744071739514846 = 0x8A939FDE and the appropriate
value perhaps should be 0x8A939FDE = 2324930526.
[...]
Reminds me that