On Fri, 2007-06-01 at 08:55 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >
> > panic. See the code flow from xntimer_start_*periodic for instance, up
> > to the point where the timer is enqueued.
>
> With wrong I meant valid sched, but for an incorrect CPU.
>
As explained earlier, nothing really bad would happen
Jan Kiszka wrote:
...
> fast-tsc-to-ns-v2.patch
>
> [Rebased, improved rounding of least significant digit]
Rounding in the fast path for the sake of the last digit was silly.
Instead, I'm now addressing the ugly interval printing via
xnarch_precise_tsc_to_ns when converting the timer interva
Philippe Gerum wrote:
...
>> This
>> is a widely orthogonal issue, so please let us come back to my original
>> point.
>>
>
> The original proposal suggests an ad hoc solution for a specific class
> of tracing needs (code flow analysis with low temporal invasiveness)
> (*).
>
> I suggest that we
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 11:14 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> ...
> >> This
> >> is a widely orthogonal issue, so please let us come back to my original
> >> point.
> >>
> >
> > The original proposal suggests an ad hoc solution for a specific class
> > of tracing needs (code flow
Hi,
> Does anyone have a Xenomai patch for the cirrus ep93xx processors?
> I understand it has an RTAI port,
> but I'd prefer to stay on the Xenomai side if possible.
I have an implementation against a 2.6.15 kernel that I never posted
because it is still "rough around the edges". But as time p
Thank you,
Looks like a good starting point.
NZG
On Tuesday 05 June 2007 5:58 am, Detlev Zundel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > Does anyone have a Xenomai patch for the cirrus ep93xx processors?
> > I understand it has an RTAI port,
> > but I'd prefer to stay on the Xenomai side if possible.
>
> I have an imp
Philippe Gerum wrote:
>>> (*) You could avoid passing the function name in the systrace calls, by
>>> relying on the value of __FUNCTION__, with a small hack to trimm the
>>> __wrap_ prefix when needed. Making tracepoints less hairy would ease my
>>> pain reading this stuff.
>> OK, but let's not sp
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
(*) You could avoid passing the function name in the systrace calls, by
relying on the value of __FUNCTION__, with a small hack to trimm the
__wrap_ prefix when needed. Making tracepoints less hairy would ease my
pain reading this stuff.
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> ...
> > fast-tsc-to-ns-v2.patch
> >
> > [Rebased, improved rounding of least significant digit]
>
> Rounding in the fast path for the sake of the last digit was silly.
> Instead, I'm now addressing the ugly interval printing via
> xnarch_precis
