From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4534C6F0.2010500@domain.hid> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:05:04 +0200 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Adeos/Xenomai Arm Port References: <1161013724.5503.65.camel@domain.hid> <1161034219.5131.81.camel@domain.hid> <45349113.2010700@domain.hid> <1161079474.5154.8.camel@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <1161079474.5154.8.camel@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: rpm@xenomai.org, xenomai@xenomai.org Philippe Gerum wrote: >>All benchmark drivers (timerbench, switchtest and irqbench) use the >>/dev/rttest%d devices, the device index is passed to latency >>and irqbench using the -D option whereas switchtest uses the ioctl error >>to find the correct device. So this error might simply be the sign that >>Manfred did not pass the -D option to latency. > > > AFAICS, the failed operation did not happen on an attempt to open the > device, but later when submitting an ioctl() request to it, in order to > start the sampling. So this can't be a simple device index issue. IOW, > the rttestX device is available and ready to use; the problem lies > beyond that point. When using the wrong /dev/rttest device, open would not fail but ioctl would fail. But I agree, Manfred is facing a different issue. -- Gilles Chanteperdrix