Hi Jan On Friday 02 March 2007 08:40, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Maybe a conflict with parport_pc. > > Wolfgang, do we always have to remove that module, or is there a chance > to cooperate with it without loosing real-time? When removing the Linux > parport layer, there is the risk that the port is powered off (see > irqbench), and xeno_can_peak_dng does not account for this yet.
Apologies if you're already aware of the following... There are a series of calls within the parport subsystem that allow you to register the driver and claim exclusive access to the port - This has several advantages: * The IO address is validated (usefull for PCI cards). * IRQ & base addresses returned in a single struct. * Correct IEEE-1284 device present can be checked. * IEEE-1284 modes configured with a single call. * Numerous read/write calls for EPP/SP modes (depending on .config, not RT safe). Retaining parport_pc should avoid any problems with the port being powered off and also allow easy access to PCI card based ports... Unfortunately I don't have a Can dongle to test, so can only offer pointers to parport.h and http://people.redhat.com/twaugh/parport/html/parportguide.html - Although the doc relates to 2.4 series kernels, the info is valid for 2.6.xx (I'm using parport_claim & friends for another project). Regards, Paul. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-help mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
