From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <45F68258.5040603@domain.hid> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 11:52:08 +0100 From: Wolfgang Grandegger MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------060208020601090504030203" Subject: [Xenomai-help] Latencies due to RT-Socket-CAN register accesses List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: xenomai-help This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060208020601090504030203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hallo, in the meantime I have measured the latencies introduced through messages sent and received by RT-Socket-CAN. The SJA1000 register access times on my rather old PC with an Athlon 1100 Mhz are: PEAK-Dongle: read access: 11807 ns PEAK-Dongle: write access: 11677 ns IXXAT-PCI : read access: 729 ns IXXAT-PCI : write access: 305 ns I measured an increase of the latency of approx. 170us with the PEAK-Dongle and approx 13us with the IXXAT-PCI card for the reception of a full CAN message (with 8 bytes payload). Sending messages is a bit less disturbing. I have attached a small patch to measure the SJA1000 register access times when the driver is initialized. You are welcome to apply it on your setup and report the results. I'm especially interested in numbers for the ISA bus (or PC-104). Wolfgang. --------------060208020601090504030203 Content-Type: text/x-patch; name="xenomai-rtcan-iotest.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xenomai-rtcan-iotest.patch" + diff -u xenomai/ksrc/drivers/can/rtcan_dev.c.IOTEST xenomai/ksrc/drivers/can/rtcan_dev.c + diff -u xenomai/ksrc/drivers/can/sja1000/rtcan_sja1000.c.IOTEST xenomai/ksrc/drivers/can/sja1000/rtcan_sja1000.c --- xenomai/ksrc/drivers/can/sja1000/rtcan_sja1000.c.IOTEST 2007-02-26 09:17:27.000000000 +0100 +++ xenomai/ksrc/drivers/can/sja1000/rtcan_sja1000.c 2007-03-13 10:01:47.000000000 +0100 @@ -728,6 +728,30 @@ if (chip == NULL) return -EINVAL; +#if 1 + { + nanosecs_abs_t begin, diff; + volatile u8 reg; + int i, count = 100000; + begin = rtdm_clock_read(); + for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { + reg = chip->read_reg(dev, 0); + } + diff = rtdm_clock_read() - begin; + printk("%s: register read time for %d accessed: %ld (%ld per access)\n", + dev->board_name, count, + (unsigned long)diff, (unsigned long)diff / count); + begin = rtdm_clock_read(); + for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { + chip->write_reg(dev, 0, reg); + } + diff = rtdm_clock_read() - begin; + printk("%s: register write time for %d accessed: %ld (%ld per access)\n", + dev->board_name, count, + (unsigned long)diff, (unsigned long)diff / count); + } +#endif + /* Set dummy state for following call */ dev->state = CAN_STATE_ACTIVE; /* Enter reset mode */ --------------060208020601090504030203--