From: Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
To: Gilles Chanteperdrix <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org>
Cc: "Jan Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>,
xenomai-core <xenomai@xenomai.org>,
"Cornelius Köpp" <Cornelius.Koepp@domain.hid>
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] latencys drifting into negative (Xenomai 2.4.2/2.4.3)
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 17:52:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47F64EC5.3090007@domain.hid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2ff1a98a0804040848w44037164n18ea4d61f38ffa51@domain.hid>
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid> wrote:
>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>
>>> Right. We are approximating a fraction with another fraction. But my
>>> first impression remains: I do not like the idea of making
>>> xnarch_ns_to_tsc wrong because xnarch_tsc_to_ns is wrong.
>>>
>> Well, my first impression was originally the same: If we still need llimd
>> in the ns-to-tsc patch, then we should keep the precise way. But that was
>> wrong as this thread demonstrated. We have to ensure that
>> ns_to_tsc(tsc_to_ns(x)) remains x with only minor last-digit errors. So
>> either use scaled math parameters in both ways or fall back to the original
>> calculation.
>
> Now that I think about it, this scaled math approach is about taking
> an approximation of the CPU frequency, which is already approximative.
> So, I will not oppose longer to your patch.
>
Ok, so I take this for a green light to commit too. Please commit.
>> However the final decision for 2.5 is (pro or contra scaled math), at least
>> for 2.4.x we have to fix things now without turning the upside down. That
>> means apply my patch or revert scaled-math optimizations for all archs.
>
>
>
--
Philippe.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-04 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-01 23:26 [Xenomai-core] latencys drifting into negative (Xenomai 2.4.2/2.4.3) Cornelius Köpp
2008-04-02 3:01 ` Tomas Kalibera
2008-04-02 9:04 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-02 12:00 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-02 12:28 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-02 12:46 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-02 13:00 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-02 15:28 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-02 15:58 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-02 16:05 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-02 16:24 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-03 12:17 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-03 12:27 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-03 12:50 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-03 12:52 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-03 13:15 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-03 21:52 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-04 8:23 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2008-04-04 10:45 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-04 13:18 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-04 13:25 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-04 13:32 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-04 13:32 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-04 13:57 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-04 14:09 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-04 14:33 ` Jan Kiszka
2008-04-04 15:48 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-04-04 15:52 ` Philippe Gerum [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47F64EC5.3090007@domain.hid \
--to=rpm@xenomai.org \
--cc=Cornelius.Koepp@domain.hid \
--cc=gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org \
--cc=jan.kiszka@domain.hid \
--cc=xenomai@xenomai.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.