From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:14:37 +0200 From: Richard Cochran Message-ID: <20110411171437.GA3715@domain.hid> References: <20110409184122.GA11908@domain.hid> <20110409185503.GB11908@domain.hid> <4DA0B580.4070602@domain.hid> <4DA0B878.9010106@domain.hid> <20110410065250.GA28869@domain.hid> <4DA17996.3010103@domain.hid> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DA17996.3010103@domain.hid> Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] arm ixp: more trouble with recent xenomai List-Id: Xenomai life and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 11:34:14AM +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Richard Cochran wrote: > > I will try xenomai 2.5 with ipipe 2.6.35 next... I meant to say, Xenomai 2.4 with ipipe 2.6.35, but this does not work because the kernel definitions have changed: include/asm-generic/xenomai/hal.h: In function 'rthal_get_cpufreq': include/asm-generic/xenomai/hal.h:168: error: 'struct ipipe_sysinfo' has no member named 'cpufreq' include/asm-generic/xenomai/hal.h: In function 'rthal_get_timerfreq': include/asm-generic/xenomai/hal.h:175: error: 'struct ipipe_sysinfo' has no member named 'archdep' But I think its not worth the effort to try that combination. > Ok, please try Xenomai 2.5.6 with I-pipe for 2.6.30, in order to know if > the difference comes from the I-pipe of from Xenomai. So here is what I measured. Despite all the performance enhancements added in Xenomai 2.5, it seems that 2.4 still performs better on my platform. The difference isn't huge, but it is visible. |------------+------+------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+----------| | Kernel | | Xeno | IPIPE | | | | | | Vers | FCSE | Vers | DEBUG | lat min | lat avg | lat max | duration | |------------+------+------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+----------| | v30 | yes | v2.4.10 | no | 8.430 | 17.310 | 63.510 | 00:02:35 | | v30 | yes | v2.5.6 [1] | no | 7.260 | 32.745 | 80.775 | 00:03:09 | | v30 | yes | v2.5.6 [2] | no | 7.140 | 34.950 | 78.375 | 00:03:21 | |------------+------+------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+----------| | v31 | yes | v2.5.6 | no | 7.215 | 34.020 | 85.350 | 00:02:58 | | v33 | yes | v2.5.6 | yes | 17.250 | 55.815 | 127.516 | 00:02:00 | | v35 | yes | v2.5.6 | yes | 7.140 | 34.200 | 84.180 | 00:02:17 | | v35-revert | yes | v2.5.6 | no | 7.350 | 29.430 | 85.185 | 00:05:50 | | v35 | no | v2.5.6 | no | 6.960 | 109.500 | 214.156 | 00:09:41 | |------------+------+------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+----------| [1] CONFIG_IPIPE_WANT_PREEMPTIBLE_SWITCH=y [2] CONFIG_IPIPE_WANT_PREEMPTIBLE_SWITCH=n Gilles, I will try your tsc test program later this week... Thanks, Richard