* [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP
@ 2008-05-06 8:11 Benjamin ZORES
2008-05-06 9:13 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Benjamin ZORES @ 2008-05-06 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xenomai-core
Hi,
I'm currently running an x86_32 SMP system and facing some issues with
periodic tasks.
I'd like to get a bit more information on a few assumptions I've made.
Quick sum-up of my setup:
- adeos-ipipe-2.6.23-i386-1.12-03
- xenomai-2.4.3.patch
- Core 2 Duo x86_32 running in SMP
- Linux 2.6.23.17
- Timer frequency: 1000 Hz
- Tick-less mode activated (CONFIG_NO_HZ)
- Xenomai Periodic Timing enabled (CONFIG_XENO_OPT_TIMING_PERIODIC)
- tasks are kernel-based.
I'm trying to schedule a periodic task each 8ms and I'm running into
period miss
(loosing from 5 up to 75, which is quite A LOT). The problem however
doesn't appear
on UP system (or at least when booting the kernel with maxcpus=1 ).
I'd like to have more information regarding timer handling.
First, I create my 8ms periodic task, the following way:
SRTIME ticks;
int period = 8;
/* need to feed with nano-seconds, then convert to CPU ticks */
ticks = rt_timer_ns2ticks(1000000 * period);
rt_task_set_periodic (task, TM_NOW, ticks);
Is it the correct way to do ?
It seems the rt_timer_ns2ticks() function is useless, i.e. it seems that
1 tick = 1 ns,
which sees weird to me.
Also, what does the rt_timer_read() function really return in my context ?
Jiffies ? Nanoseconds ? Clock ticks ?
From the different headers and documentation pieces I've read, none
seem to be really
explicit regarding the returned value.
Any help, is really appreciated.
Ben
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP
2008-05-06 8:11 [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP Benjamin ZORES
@ 2008-05-06 9:13 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-05-06 9:27 ` Benjamin ZORES
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2008-05-06 9:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Benjamin ZORES; +Cc: xenomai-core
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Benjamin ZORES
<benjamin.zores@domain.hid> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently running an x86_32 SMP system and facing some issues with
> periodic tasks.
> I'd like to get a bit more information on a few assumptions I've made.
>
> Quick sum-up of my setup:
> - adeos-ipipe-2.6.23-i386-1.12-03
> - xenomai-2.4.3.patch
> - Core 2 Duo x86_32 running in SMP
Why not x86_64 ?
> - Linux 2.6.23.17
> - Timer frequency: 1000 Hz
> - Tick-less mode activated (CONFIG_NO_HZ)
> - Xenomai Periodic Timing enabled (CONFIG_XENO_OPT_TIMING_PERIODIC)
> - tasks are kernel-based.
>
> I'm trying to schedule a periodic task each 8ms and I'm running into
> period miss
> (loosing from 5 up to 75, which is quite A LOT). The problem however
> doesn't appear
> on UP system (or at least when booting the kernel with maxcpus=1 ).
Have you run the latency test to know if you have no hardware issue ?
--
Gilles
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP
2008-05-06 9:13 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2008-05-06 9:27 ` Benjamin ZORES
2008-05-06 9:31 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Benjamin ZORES @ 2008-05-06 9:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xenomai-core
Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit :
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Benjamin ZORES
> <benjamin.zores@domain.hid> wrote:
>
>
> Why not x86_64 ?
>
>
Cause I don't need 64 bits.
>
> Have you run the latency test to know if you have no hardware issue ?
>
>
Do you have a quick way to start this test ?
Regards,
Ben
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP
2008-05-06 9:27 ` Benjamin ZORES
@ 2008-05-06 9:31 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2008-05-06 9:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Benjamin ZORES; +Cc: xenomai-core
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Benjamin ZORES
<benjamin.zores@domain.hid> wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix a écrit :
>
> > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Benjamin ZORES
> > <benjamin.zores@domain.hid> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Why not x86_64 ?
> >
> >
> Cause I don't need 64 bits.
>
> >
> > Have you run the latency test to know if you have no hardware issue ?
> >
> >
> Do you have a quick way to start this test ?
cd /usr/xenomai/testsuite/latency
./runt
--
Gilles
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-05-06 9:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-05-06 8:11 [Xenomai-core] Timing Issues on x86_32 SMP Benjamin ZORES
2008-05-06 9:13 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2008-05-06 9:27 ` Benjamin ZORES
2008-05-06 9:31 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
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.