Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
I really tried to not answer this message and finish the "endless thread" you
mentioned, but I couldn't resist. ;) Maybe this will be the last post from my
own on this thread and will begin writing in the new thread. See below,
please.
Don't bother with self-cen
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
Actually, I noted a minor typo error in the documentation:
" of the this service" should be " of this service"
this is the kind of thing that youre encouraged to create a patch for.
Same for other doc nits - youre offering 'something-like' suggestions,
when yo
--- Jan Kiszka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> ...
> >> Moreover, when considering the TSC as high-resolution timestamp source,
> >> this is not applicable on SMP / multicore systems. Those tend to have
> >> unsynchronised and drifting TSCs. So if the first picture was taken on
> >> one CPU and th
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> I really tried to not answer this message and finish the "endless thread" you
> mentioned, but I couldn't resist. ;) Maybe this will be the last post from my
> own on this thread and will begin writing in the new thread. See below,
> please.
I see no problem in
I really tried to not answer this message and finish the "endless thread" you
mentioned, but I couldn't resist. ;) Maybe this will be the last post from my
own on this thread and will begin writing in the new thread. See below,
please.
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 16:00, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>
>> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>>> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:59, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:
Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:46, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
... Another one is for timeouts on short dela
Em Terça 14 Março 2006 16:00, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:59, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:
>>> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:46, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>>> ... Another one is for timeouts on short delays. In
>>> those cases, we want a go
Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:59, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:
>Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:46, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
> ... Another one is for timeouts on short delays. In
> those cases, we want a good resolution, but this should be independent
> of the user's timer choice IMO.
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:59, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:
>
>> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:46, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>> ... Another one is for timeouts on short delays. In
>> those cases, we want a good resolution, but this should be independent
>> o
Em Terça 14 Março 2006 13:46, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
... Another one is for timeouts on short delays. In
those cases, we want a good resolution, but this should be independent
of the user's timer choice IMO.
>>>
>>> And this is something rtdm_clock_read_tsc() will obviously not be fo
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Terça 14 Março 2006 03:44, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>
>> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>>> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 20:05, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
...
>> We would definitely need a good name for it,
>> rtdm_clock_read_ex(), rtdm_clock_read_tsc(),
>>>
Em Terça 14 Março 2006 03:44, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 20:05, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>>> ...
>>>
> We would definitely need a good name for it,
> rtdm_clock_read_ex(), rtdm_clock_read_tsc(),
> rtdm_clock_read_monotonic()? I'm not go
Anders Blomdell wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> ...
>> Thinking about this more thoroughly, a few questions popped up for me:
>>
>> o When we call it rtdm_clock_read_tsc(), we should actually return the
>> raw TSC values, shouln't we? But then we also need conversion
>> functions (rtdm_clock_tsc2
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 20:05, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>> ...
We would definitely need a good name for it,
rtdm_clock_read_ex(), rtdm_clock_read_tsc(),
rtdm_clock_read_monotonic()? I'm not going to break rtdm_clock_read() by
adding an argument (oth
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 20:05, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
> ...
>>> We would definitely need a good name for it,
>>> rtdm_clock_read_ex(), rtdm_clock_read_tsc(),
>>> rtdm_clock_read_monotonic()? I'm not going to break rtdm_clock_read() by
>>> adding an argument (otherwise, I would have to fix too many d
>...
>"Resolution" is the accurate term, indeed. To include what I think is
>the core of your suggestions:
>...
Please, ignore this. As I've said in another message, I was reading a prior
documentation version. It is good the way it is.
Rodrigo.
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 15:33, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>
>> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>>> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 14:25, Gilles Chanteperdrix escreveu:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Sometimes the result is "Should be near 84000: 10", that is kind of
>>
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 15:33, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 14:25, Gilles Chanteperdrix escreveu:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Sometimes the result is "Should be near 84000: 10", that is kind of
> correct, since the tickval is 10, alt
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 15:24, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> Sorry Jan, I was looking at a different documentation. Now I read the
>> right one. It is good. But I didn't understand why didn't you keep the
>> latter note: "The nucleus timer has to be started to obtain val
Actually, I noted a minor typo error in the documentation:
" of the this service" should be " of this service"
Best Regards,
Rodrigo.
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 14:58, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:
>Sorry Jan, I was looking at a dif
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 08:48, você escreveu:
>> ...
>>
>>> Do you mean that rtdm_clock_read will always read a multiple of tickval
>>> value? If so, I think it would be good to make it clear on its
>>> documentation. "Get system time" isn't enough for getting this
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 14:25, Gilles Chanteperdrix escreveu:
>
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
Sometimes the result is "Should be near 84000: 10", that is kind of
correct, since the tickval is 10, although I think that those
functions in the RTDM driv
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Sorry Jan, I was looking at a different documentation. Now I read the right
> one. It is good. But I didn't understand why didn't you keep the latter note:
> "The nucleus timer has to be started to obtain valid results." I would
> include it before the other note
Sorry Jan, I was looking at a different documentation. Now I read the right
one. It is good. But I didn't understand why didn't you keep the latter note:
"The nucleus timer has to be started to obtain valid results." I would
include it before the other note.
Thank you,
Rodrigo.
__
Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > Sometimes the result is "Should be near 84000: 10", that is kind of
> > correct, since the tickval is 10, although I think that those
> > functions
> > in the RTDM driver context should be independent of the tick value set by
> > the
> > user program... Mayb
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 14:25, Gilles Chanteperdrix escreveu:
>Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > > Sometimes the result is "Should be near 84000: 10", that is kind of
> > > correct, since the tickval is 10, although I think that those
> > > functions in the RTDM driver context should be independent o
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 11:54, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas escreveu:
>I liked the note, but I would include another one:
>"When in periodic mode, the time resolution is limited to the tick set to
> the system timer" or something like. Maybe
Em Segunda 13 Março 2006 08:48, você escreveu:
>...
>
>> Do you mean that rtdm_clock_read will always read a multiple of tickval
>> value? If so, I think it would be good to make it clear on its
>> documentation. "Get system time" isn't enough for getting this
>> information, IMHO.
>
>Please have a
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Sexta 10 Março 2006 15:32, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>
>> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>>> Em Quinta 09 Março 2006 17:33, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> I'm still concerned about the future of RTDM and timer funct
Em Sexta 10 Março 2006 15:32, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> Em Quinta 09 Março 2006 17:33, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>>> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
Hi Jan,
I'm still concerned about the future of RTDM and timer functions. I
think there should be some fu
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Em Quinta 09 Março 2006 17:33, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>
>> Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>>> Hi Jan,
>>>
>>> I'm still concerned about the future of RTDM and timer functions. I think
>>> there should be some function for starting the timer manually, since the
>>> au
Em Quinta 09 Março 2006 17:33, Jan Kiszka escreveu:
>Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>> I'm still concerned about the future of RTDM and timer functions. I think
>> there should be some function for starting the timer manually, since the
>> automatic feature don't work great for RTDM
Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> I'm still concerned about the future of RTDM and timer functions. I think
> there should be some function for starting the timer manually, since the
> automatic feature don't work great for RTDM drivers.
>
> It is not nice to have to run the latency
33 matches
Mail list logo
