2011/5/2 Jean-Michel Hautbois
> 2011/5/2 Philippe Gerum :
> > On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 11:56 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> >> 2011/5/2 Jean-Michel Hautbois :
> >> > 2011/4/30 Philippe Gerum :
> >> >> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 18:08 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> >> >>> 2011/4/29 Philippe Ge
2011/5/2 Philippe Gerum :
> On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 11:56 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> 2011/5/2 Jean-Michel Hautbois :
>> > 2011/4/30 Philippe Gerum :
>> >> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 18:08 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> >>> 2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
>> >>> > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +
On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 11:56 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> 2011/5/2 Jean-Michel Hautbois :
> > 2011/4/30 Philippe Gerum :
> >> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 18:08 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> >>> 2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
> >>> > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
2011/5/2 Jean-Michel Hautbois :
> 2011/4/30 Philippe Gerum :
>> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 18:08 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>>> 2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
>>> > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>>> >> 2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
>>> >> > On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +
2011/4/30 Philippe Gerum :
> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 18:08 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> 2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
>> > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> >> 2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
>> >> > On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> >>
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 18:08 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> 2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
> > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> >> 2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
> >> > On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> >> >> Hi list,
> >> >>
> >> >> I am
On 2011-04-29 18:08, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> 2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
>> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>>> 2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I am currently using a Xenoma
2011/4/29 Philippe Gerum :
> On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> 2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
>> > On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> >> Hi list,
>> >>
>> >> I am currently using a Xenomai port on a linux 2.6.35.11 linux kernel
>> >> and th
On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 10:33 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> 2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
> > On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> >> Hi list,
> >>
> >> I am currently using a Xenomai port on a linux 2.6.35.11 linux kernel
> >> and the adeos-ipipe-2.6.35.7-powerpc-2.12
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 11:53:32PM +0200, Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Yes, but that can't be easily summarized here. In short, we have a
> serious problem with the sharing of the MMU context between the Linux
> and Xenomai schedulers in the SMP case on powerpc.
BTW, I have been running xenomai 2.5 on
2011/4/27 Philippe Gerum :
> On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I am currently using a Xenomai port on a linux 2.6.35.11 linux kernel
>> and the adeos-ipipe-2.6.35.7-powerpc-2.12-01.patch.
>> I am facing a scheduling issue on a P2020 (dual core PowerPC)
On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 20:42 +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> I am currently using a Xenomai port on a linux 2.6.35.11 linux kernel
> and the adeos-ipipe-2.6.35.7-powerpc-2.12-01.patch.
> I am facing a scheduling issue on a P2020 (dual core PowerPC), and I
> get the following messa
Hi list,
I am currently using a Xenomai port on a linux 2.6.35.11 linux kernel
and the adeos-ipipe-2.6.35.7-powerpc-2.12-01.patch.
I am facing a scheduling issue on a P2020 (dual core PowerPC), and I
get the following message :
Badness at arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_nohash.c:209
NIP: c0018d20 LR:
13 matches
Mail list logo