Krzysztof Błaszkowski wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 16:30 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Krzysztof Błaszkowski wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 16:10 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>> Krzysztof Błaszkowski wrote:
>>>>> yes. i downloaded this config a while ago. need to setup new kernel
>>>>> 2.6.31.1 with xenomai. 
>>>>> is 2.5.4 suitable for this test ? 
>>>>> should i also use adeos-*.31.1-*2.4-09 patch ?
>>>> See the versions I posted in my test report yesterday. They were made
>>>> with this configuration.
>>>>
>>> ok. kernel 2.6.31.8, 2.5.4, ht will be enabled,
>>>
>>> for xenomai's configure i will pass following switches:
>>> --enable-x86-sep --enable-x86-tsc --enable-smp
>>>
>>> is this okay ?
>> Yes.
>>
> 
> bingo !
> 
> atest:~/xeno-test-254-2 # ./.try.sh 
> main:79 heap 0x401b1000
> /root/xeno-test-254-2
> main:96 [823] pid 825
> main:89
> main:90 [825] pid 0
> main:99 [823] pid 825, status 00000b00
> main:100 [823] pid 825, WIFSIGNALED 0, WIFEXITED 1, rc 11
> 0
> atest:~/xeno-test-254-2 # uname -a
> Linux atest 2.6.31.8-xeno254-smp-ht #1 SMP Wed Aug 18 17:04:00 CEST 2010
> i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux
> 
> 
> my fork() test works now with kernel configured with your config.
> 
> so this try proves no doubt that userland (libc, pthreads and so on)
> work.
> 
> and i guess that this memory corruption which caused fork to die inside
> libc can be something specific to UP configuration. (i was thinking
> about using my config with smp this time)
> 
> Thank you for sending me kernel configuration which pointed out an area
> which should be searched further.

Yes, now if you find the culprit option, it would be nice to report here
so that we can fix the I-pipe patch.

-- 
                                            Gilles.


_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to