From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4480CEE3.40309@domain.hid> Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 17:50:59 -0600 From: Jim Cromie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] [rfc] unit testing context switches. References: <17536.40316.183366.284818@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <17536.40316.183366.284818@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Now that the big context switches bugs have been solved, here is a patch > that adds a unit test for context switches and FPU switches > with various type of threads (kernel, user, user in secondary mode, > not using FPU, using FPU, etc...). As is the case of the latency test > there is a small RTDM driver in kernel-space, put in the benchmark > class, even though this test is for unit testing, not for benchmarking. > > The FPU switches need a small piece of code architecture dependent, > put in , currently only implemented for x86. > > The kernel-space driver is called xeno_switchtest.ko, the user-space > testing tool is called switchtest, because there is already a context > switch benchmarking tool called "switch". > > does this maybe warrant a rename of both, to preclude the inevitable 'whats the difference between' Qs (sent or unsent) ?