Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:35 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > > BTW, with latest SVN trunk and scalable sched, the oopses are gone but > > > > latency still doesn't start up: > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :/root# cat /proc/xenomai/sched > > > > CPU PID PRI PERIOD TIMEOUT TIMEBASE STAT NAME > > > > 0 0 -1 0 0 master R ROOT > > > > 0 930 0 0 0 master R > display-928 > > > > 0 931 99 0 0 master R > sampling-928 > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] :/root# cat /proc/xenomai/stat > > > > CPU PID MSW CSW PF STAT %CPU NAME > > > > 0 0 0 0 0 00500080 100.0 ROOT > > > > 0 930 0 0 0 00300188 0.0 display-928 > > > > 0 931 0 0 0 00300188 0.0 sampling-928 > > > > > > Two threads in ready state with higher priority than the root one: this > > > means that a rescheduling opportunity has been missed, or more > > > precisely, someone may be lying to xnpod_schedule() wrt to priority > > > ordering when the scalable sched is enabled. > > > > ffsmlq uses ffnz, and there are two implementations of ffnz, one in > > asm/hal.h which is correct on x86_64, the other in nucleus/system.h > > which uses ffs hence only operates on ints. > > Never mind, nucleus/system.h is only included when using Xenomai headers > in user-space. Nevertheless, it should probably use ffsl instead of ffs. >
Who the hell is using the ffnz implementation in system.h? The simulator? I kicked it out for a x64-build here, and I got no noticeable effects.
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomaiemail@example.com https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core