From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <45B086B1.3060105@domain.hid> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 09:52:01 +0100 From: Theo Veenker MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] irq conflict References: <45ADEDDC.5060407@domain.hid> <45AEA9A7.7000001@domain.hid> <45AFC392.5050705@domain.hid> <45AFD3E2.8090200@domain.hid> <1169152829.25556.25.camel@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <1169152829.25556.25.camel@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; 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 Cc: Xenomai , Jan Kiszka Philippe Gerum wrote: > On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 21:09 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>Theo Veenker wrote: >> >>>Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> >>>>Theo Veenker wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi all, >>>>> >>>>>I need to run xenomai on a HP Compaq nc6320. I use kernel 2.6.17.14 >>>>>and xenomai 2.2.5. The non-realtime kernel runs fine on this laptop, >>>> >>>>Means the same kernel with I-pipe (and Xenomai) disabled or the same >>>>kernel version and .config, but unpatched? >>> >>>The latter. >>> >>> >>>>>but the xenomai pactched kernel gives several of these messages: >>>>> >>>>> IRQ routing conflict for xxxx.xx.xx.x, have irq 11, want irq 10 >>>>> >>>>>And some things (e.g. mouse, network) then don't work, not properly >>>>>anyway. The same kernel runs fine however on other systems. >>>>> >>>>>Any clue what I can do about it? >>>> >>>>Please provide bootlogs for both rt and non-rt kernel startup. And the >>>>.config. >>> >>>I 'solved' it by enabling ACPI (without processor module and others). >>>Looks good. I don't see high latencies with the latency test. Under >>>what conditions might ACPI affect real-time behaviour? >> >>CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR, because it allows deep sleep states with >>significant wakeup latencies. >> >>But back to your original issue: You mean your notebook booted fine >>under vanilla Linux with ACPI disabled? That would mean I-pipe relies on >>ACPI here without stating this anywhere. In that case /something/ needs >>fixing: code, config deps, or doc. >> > > > It doesn't, at least, not willingly. Before drawing any conclusion, > please try 2.6.19 with the same configuration first: the generic irq > layer may have had a positive influence on the I-pipe in this area. I'd love to try it, but there is no 2.6.19 patch for 2.2.5. When 2.3 was released I tried using that, but failed (unable to load the posix module or something I don't remember exactly). Since I had only a few days to convert all our systems (for language and speech research) from RTLinux to Xenomai I decided to stay at 2.2.5 until quieter times. Hope to figure it out soon. Theo