Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>On 10/11/2005 05:11 PM Fillod Stephane wrote:
>> Heikki Lindholm wrote:
>>> Probably, but there are less than awesome 4xx boards around and I'd
>>> guess they might even be more likely targets than G4 based machines,
>>> example. Some tuning might be needed.
>> How many people are using Xenomai (or Fusion) on 4xx ?
>> What are their typical sched latency ?
>Attached is the result of some latency measurements on the Ocotea eval
>board. The AMCC 440 GX is already a fast 4xx processor. Unfortunately,
>the linuxppc-2.6.10rc3 does not run on our Ebony board. Nevertheless,
>it's difficult to provide a resonable default value. Why not simply
>using 0 and it's then up to the user to provide an appropriate value
>at configuration time?
If it helps, know there's 2.6.10 and 2.6.11 (CONFIG_PREEMPT disabled
though) ADEOS patches available for ppc.
My latency measurements for Freescale e500 are here:
It looks like an ADEOS/I-Pipe patch for current Linux kernels is much
The default calibration value may be set according to L1_CACHE_BYTES.
Of course I'm fine with a default value set to 0, which is closer to my
end of the spectrum :-)