Hello all,

My name is Sean McGranaghan, I am a software engineer working in Rochester, NY. USA. I have recently been tasked with porting a standard Linux driver to the RTAI/fusion environment. I have RTAI/fusion 0.8.3 up and running with a 2.6.13 kernel. I have a couple general questions, followed by my specific problem. I apologize for the length of this post in advance, this is my first foray into RTAI/fusion. Please direct this message as appropriate.

When a realtime RTAI native or LXRT task performs io using a vanilla Linux driver, does it retain its realtime scheduling priority via the nucleaus scheduler or is the task demoted to the non-realtime domain i.e. the Linux scheduler? Assume the vanilla Linux driver uses wake_up_interruptible() to wake Linux tasks.

Is there a standard approach to making a driver "realtime"? I would assume replacing the interrupt handling, synchronization and task scheduling calls with RTAI/fusion equivalents would be the approach to take. How does this affect the file operations interface in Linux? (open(), close(), read(), write(), ioctl() etc.) Is this driver still usable by non-realtime Linux tasks?

My specific problem is to make an existing Linux driver "realtime". (Vague requirement I know.) The driver is for an ISA CAN bus card. The card contains two CAN controllers using two irqs. My first step was to try and get the irq handling under nucleus control. I replaced request_irq() and related Linux irq calls with rt_intr_create() and such. I was then going to look at replacing the Linux spin_lock_irqsave()/spin_unlock_irqrestore() and wake_interruptble() calls if needed. I am currently having problems with the first step.

I test the driver with a loopback cable between the two channels. In the pure Linux driver I send and receive datagrams with no problem. I receive a transmit complete interrupt immediatly followed by a message received interrupt for each datagram sent. When I replace the interrupt handling with RTAI/fusion calls I seem to be missing the receive interrupt. I have looked at the CAN controller register contents and they are consistant between the vanilla driver and realtime driver. I am currently trying to look at the 8259 PIC controller register contents to see how the interrupt handling differs. I suspect that the mixing of nucleaus interrupt handling and Linux spin locks (irq save/restore) is fouling up the PIC, but I can't prove this yet. Is there any benefit to moving the interrupt handling to the realtime domain?

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Sean McGranaghan

Reply via email to