From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <435356FB.7080706@domain.hid> Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 09:47:07 +0200 From: Wolfgang Grandegger MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] Testing the adeos-ipipe-2.6.13-ppc-1.0-00.patch References: <43514FE1.80703@domain.hid> <435155D1.5090302@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <435155D1.5090302@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Heikki Lindholm Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org On 10/15/2005 09:17 PM Heikki Lindholm wrote: > Wolfgang Grandegger kirjoitti: >> Hello Philippe, >> >> I got Xenomai working on a Ocotea-Board (AMCC 440GX) and a low-end >> TQM855L-Module (MPC 855) under Linux 2.6.14-rc3 :-). The patch applied >> with a few hunks and one easy to fix reject and I had to correct two >> problems. One with FEW_CONTEXT (see attached patch) and the second with >> "#include " in "xenomai/arch/ppc/hal/switch.S". The >> include file does not exist (any more) in the kernel tree and therefore >> I commented out the line. I'm going to perform latency tests on various >> 4xx and 8xx boards next week. Here are some preliminary figures of the >> TQM855L-Module (CPU 80 MHz, Bus 40 MHz, 4 kB I-Cache 4 kB D-Cache): > > If you happen to know some (semi-)comparable figures for the same boards > using some commercial RTOS, it would be nice to know them also, for > comparison. Well, we only deal with "free" software. But I can compare the result from the klatency test with the one from RTAI/RTHAL under Linux 2.4, of course. Wolfgang.