Re: [Xenomai] High CPU load using q_send under pSOS skin

[Marcel van Mierlo <marcel.vanmierlo@marel.com>]

Hi Gilles, I appreciate the input:

By observation, it is 100ms (using a trace function it looks nice and 
stable):

common_io.c cio_watchdog_kick +280 036.726273s: "WAKING"
common_io.c cio_watchdog_kick +280 036.826273s: "WAKING"
common_io.c cio_watchdog_kick +280 036.926272s: "WAKING"
common_io.c cio_watchdog_kick +280 037.026272s: "WAKING"
common_io.c cio_watchdog_kick +280 037.126272s: "WAKING"

so I am confident it is running at 100ms. The pSOS documentation refers 
to kc_ticks2sec to verify frequency, but I am not sure where to look 
under Xenomai to double check...not sure if this is relevant from 
.config, but anyway the trace comes every 100ms.

/CONFIG_XENO_OPT_TIMING_VIRTICK/=1000.

Marcel.


On 06/02/14 16:35, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 02/06/2014 05:25 PM, Marcel van Mierlo wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been investigating this for a couple of days and would really
>> appreciate some insight
>> on what might be going on or what I can do to progress this...
>>
>> I am porting a legacy pSOS application - to Xenomai on BeagleBoard Black
>> 3.8 kernel
>> and have noticed %CPU (via. top) of MAIN around 40% when using q_send,
>> and doing no "work".
>>
>> Surprisingly,  if I add a printf() and fflush() to the task body then
>> the CPU drops down to < 1%.
>>
>> I've checked compile options, nothing obviously wrong. Here is the
>> (abridged) body of the task.
>> It just provides a periodic message for watchdog purposes.
>>
>>
>> [%CPU ~%40]
>> while{1}
>> {
>>       q_send(ulCanTQid, (INT32 *)&oCanMsg);
>>       tm_wkafter(100);  // ~100ms
>
> Have you checked that the comment is right? Are you sure you are not 
> sleeping 100ns ?
>