From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44D2E878.2030509@domain.hid> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:26:00 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] testing interrupt latency References: <1154615459.9835.62.camel@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <1154615459.9835.62.camel@domain.hid> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig306E8306A404272662B2A556" Sender: jan.kiszka@domain.hid List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Bart Jonkers Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig306E8306A404272662B2A556 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bart Jonkers wrote: > Hey, >=20 > I have written a small module to test the interrupt response time of > Xenomai to compare it with the time of Linux. >=20 > I generate an interrupt on a GPIO pin and toggles another GPIO pin in > the interrupt service routine. (code below) > The time between the generated interrupt and the value change on the > GPIO pin is taken as interrupt response time. Can we say that playing with such GPIO pins is a good generic way to measure IRQ latencies on ARM platforms? If so, do you see a chance to enhance the existing irqbench framework with this mechanism? Jan --------------enig306E8306A404272662B2A556 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 iD8DBQFE0uh4niDOoMHTA+kRAnVwAJ9ledbaaQ35BjxrZQJ2H7fFxoPS/QCfRRXp +fgf0Ok8dyvzqfoiEdOIXpE= =iVjX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig306E8306A404272662B2A556--