From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krzysztof =?UTF-8?Q?B=C5=82aszkowski?= In-Reply-To: <4C6BE297.4060706@domain.hid> References: <1282047938.5255.89.camel@domain.hid> <4C6B146D.9010004@domain.hid> <1282126974.5255.262.camel@domain.hid> <4C6BBD62.3050907@domain.hid> <1282131617.5255.286.camel@domain.hid> <4C6BCB51.4010805@domain.hid> <1282133876.5255.296.camel@domain.hid> <4C6BD403.4030902@domain.hid> <1282136147.5255.306.camel@domain.hid> <4C6BE297.4060706@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:04:22 +0200 Message-Id: <1282140262.5255.313.camel@domain.hid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] xenomai 2.5.3/native, kernel 2.6.31.8 and fork() List-Id: Xenomai life and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 15:39 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Krzysztof Błaszkowski wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-08-18 at 14:37 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > >> Krzysztof Błaszkowski wrote: > >>>>> rather i use native clean x86 environment (on e.g. x86_64) > >>>> I do this all the time, and never had any problem. > >>> i had lots with header files mainly. > >> Well, the glibc and Xenomai header files are the same on 64 bits and 32 > >> bits machines... of course, if you are talking about other libs... > > > > > > ;) i don't mean Xenomai and degree of crosscompilation complexity > > depends on what you try to compile. > > i remember a few years ago it was not so funny. > > > >>> and i am happy with my way. > >>> > >>>> Also, why not running 64 bits code on your atom? There are some x86_32 > >>>> only atoms? What about SMP? > >>> for some other constraints i will not mention i use 32 bits now. > >>> > >>> this is single core cpu so no point to use smp for e.g. 8 cpus (nor > >>> bigsmp) > >> Well, my atom has hyper-threading, so, SMP can be used, Linux sees two > >> threads. I suspect yours has hyper-threading too, since Linux mentions > >> that it sees an ACPI SMP table, but usually, hyper-threading needs to be > >> enabled at BIOS level. > >> > > > > yes, it has "ht". disabled now. i thought that i don't want to try to > > solve superposition of various corner cases and stuck on solving this. > > > > otoh, i could create such case. did i ? > > > > (btw, rtai 3.7 works) > > This does not give us any clue, since neither the I-pipe patch nor the > heap code are shared. yes, i could not mention it. > But as I said, I suspect the bug is rather in the > kernel configuration than anywhere else. i see. > > We are going to try something else. The .config I use on my atom is here: > http://git.xenomai.org/?p=mkrootfs.git;a=blob_plain;f=boards/generic/atom-32/config-2.6.31;hb=HEAD > > Could you start from this configuration, adding only what is needed to > boot your box (root filesystem device controller, or network controller > if booting over nfs, root filesystem), then test this kernel? > 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 ? -- Krzysztof Blaszkowski