From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44ACB87B.9090204@domain.hid> Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 09:15:07 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] Some questions about the ARM port (Integrator vs. PXA) References: <44A3919C.596DFDAE@vollmann.ch> <1151592402.19389.31.camel@domain.hid> <44A4C4CB.5F24DA68@domain.hid> <1151657621.3060.26.camel@domain.hid> <44A8B191.3DCC39C2@domain.hid> <44A8BA2E.9090106@domain.hid> <44A8D7A1.4E4E9D27@domain.hid> <17577.4096.436840.354535@domain.hid> <17577.5372.702355.432641@domain.hid> <44AA0E21.3F17401F@vollmann.ch> <17579.47238.90918.989854@domain.hid> <44AC4ED0.4C1BF83E@vollmann.ch> In-Reply-To: <44AC4ED0.4C1BF83E@vollmann.ch> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig1955D722809BD6EC07919413" Sender: jan.kiszka@domain.hid List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Detlef Vollmann Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig1955D722809BD6EC07919413 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Detlef Vollmann wrote: > ... > And I think you're correct, for Xenomai it will work. > Unfortunately I'm trying to do a general ipipe port for PXA. > I'm doing this for a polytech who wants to use this with their > students, and so they probably want to use it with other domain > on top of ipipe (rtai 3.3, Siemens' implementation of the Posix > RT interface, and maybe even an own domain for experimenting). I think the problem is not that some interface is "public". The point is rather that inherent characteristics like "always called with interrupts off" or "has to be protected with ipipe_critical" are not yet documented. Adding such comments to your work might be a start. The same applies to how a domain can expect soon-to-expire timer events are handle= d. Creating a generic patch without basing it on Xenomai-specific assumption is a reasonable approach, for sure. Nevertheless, the first non-Xenomai user you mentioned requires more patching and far more cleanup/update of its core to work over ARM again. And the second one is unfortunately still unpublished. The third scenario is quite real. Example: I have an experimental patch for the new irqbench pending that demonstrates how to lift simple IRQ jobs over Xenomai in its own domain. Gives nice worst-case IRQ latencies even on low-end, even under heavy Linux *and* Xenomai load (the latter ATM only with a small patch against ipipe to enable preemptible IRQ handlers for all non-heading domains, not only the root one). Jan --------------enig1955D722809BD6EC07919413 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFErLh7niDOoMHTA+kRAgYXAJ9MavahkwmthSDFe4BqsV6oStCBVwCeKH/z e+jd9pEVeDlYMN2Vd3yFCfM= =KwdY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig1955D722809BD6EC07919413--