Hi, Philippe Gerum schrieb: > > I agree with the conclusion, not with the fix.
Thanks for reviewing the patch and sorry for the late answer. > - the kernel side should rather test RTHAL_CPU_FREQ for consistency in > the generic hal init code, and bail out with an error if 0 is detected, > since there is no way for the nucleus to operate properly with such > setting anyway. > > It turns out that no change have to be done in xnarch_init_timeconv() > which should remain a void routine, but its argument - RTHAL_CPU_FREQ - > should rather be tested as early as possible for consistency, directly > from kernel space. I'll post a new patch right now. Regards, Bernhard _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomaiemail@example.com https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core