On 13/02/06, Jan Kiszka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> On 11/02/06, Jan Kiszka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
>>> And as an additional option,
>>> it could be interesting to print out to the log if not all "counter"
>> values
>>> then min,max,average (the same like for the latency :) per second or per
>>> 1000 interrupts; so to see whether tweaking the MAX_EDGEIRQ_COUNTER may
>> make
>>> the things better.
>> Yes, maybe it's too small. But this also depends on the absolute time
>> required for so many loops, something we should see in the traces then.
>> I'm afraid that we will finally have to move the UART's read-from-fifo
>> to task context to reduce the time spent in IRQ context.
>
> Good. Keep me informed as before.
>

We got it working. :)

Great!


Anyway, this works now. But we also found a bug, as usual, a clean-up
bug: You released the IRQ line based on the wrong test, see attached
patch.

Ah... it worked for my test cases since it depended on the order of xnintr_detach() calls. Thanks.


With this fix applied and the IRQ flags as well as the
/proc/xenomai/irq output cleaned up, I would say you great work is ready
for merge!

So I'll create the final patch and submit it to Philippe for merging.
One more thing is making all this stuff optional; XENO_OPT_SHIRQ and XENO_OPT_SHIRQ_EDGE or something like this.
 

Thanks,
Jan



--
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko

Reply via email to