From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <45101503.5020600@domain.hid> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 18:04:19 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] How to do tracing with Xenomai on a 2.4 kernel? References: <450FEF8D.7070002@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <450FEF8D.7070002@domain.hid> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig96E272990DA5F105518784E3" 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: Yoann Allain Cc: jean-olivier.villemure@domain.hid, xenomai@xenomai.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig96E272990DA5F105518784E3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yoann Allain wrote: > Hello, >=20 > I'm new to Xenomai (I used RTAI 2~3 years ago) and as I was using LTT t= o > trace RTAI tasks on 2.4 kernel, I wanted to use it with Xenomai too. > But the fact is it seems to me that there is no LTT support in Xenomai > for 2.4 kernels... Is that right? >=20 > To do some tracing, either I work with 2.4 kernel+RTAI+LTT or with 2.6 > kernel+Xenomai+LTTng. Is that right ? Or is there another solution to d= o > some tracing on 2.4 kernel with Xenomai? >=20 Tracing based on LTTng is currently in a stalled state. We have instrumentation in place if you look at the Xenomai code, but the status of LTTng is still in flux. If you happened to have read LKML recently, a lot of dogfights took place if and how tracing should be included in Linux. LTTng or a superset with other tracers now seems to be on a fairly good way to get integrated - but surely not as-is. So I would forward the question to those (CC'ed) who already worked on the integration or have announced to do so soon. How do you see the situation and what might be the time-frame for Xenomai support now? Regarding 2.4: back-porting LTTng support is yet another issue which - as I see it - can only be considered once 2.6 support is done. LTTng's dependencies on 2.6 infrastructure will likely require "some" effort, so the question is if there will be someone to work on this (or sponsor it).= Jan --------------enig96E272990DA5F105518784E3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFEBUEniDOoMHTA+kRAmS1AJ47Qa4LK+IuB9RCZtsN1TU1hT2qBwCfbpzW SruTOCiDB5I4BzkPfJF9rFw= =XaVN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig96E272990DA5F105518784E3--