[Xenomai-help] Re: RTDM and udelay

[Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <lbocseg@domain.hid>]

Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote:

>>Is there any alternative to udelay on RTDM?
>>
>>Or should I do something like:
>>
>>void rt_udelay(unsigned int usec) {
>>  uint64_t timeout = rtdm_clock_read () + usec;
>>  while (rtdm_clock_read () < timeout);
>>}
>>    
>>
>
>You mean something like this: =:)
>
>http://www.rts.uni-hannover.de/xenomai/lxr/source/ksrc/skins/rtdm/drvlib.c?v=SVN-trunk#L366
>  
>
Yes, but it seemed too complex for me, since it disables IRQ and I do 
not need this feature. It will no problem if, instead of waiting 2us, I 
have to wait 100us because some interrupt has occurred. After I write to 
the board i2c registers, I need to wait *at least*, say, 2us before 
writing another i2c cycle.

One more thing: although the name of the function has the word "task", I 
think it is not task specific. Documentation even says it can be called 
from initialization/cleanup code. But it doesn't say if it can be called 
from an ioctl handler or any other context, although I see no problem 
when reviewing the code. Thus, I think a better name would be something 
like rtdm_busy_sleep() or rtdm_ns_delay(). Just a suggestion.

>>Or maybe my design is wrong.
>>
>>I have a function, say WriteI2C(...). Should I create it as a task and call 
>>rtdm_task_sleep?
>>    
>>
>
>Depending on how long you would like to sleep and if you are not inside
>an IRQ handler, a re-scheduling call like rtdm_task_sleep() can be
>better. If it's just about a few microseconds, busy sleeping should be
>preferred.
>  
>
Exactly what I had in mind, thanks.

Best regards,

Rodrigo.


	

	
		
_______________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! doce lar. Faça do Yahoo! sua homepage. 
http://br.yahoo.com/homepageset.html