Re: beagleboard RT problem

[Sujit K M <sjt.kar@gmail.com>]

I think there have been effort before on BeagleBoard for the Linux
kernel below is an link.
http://elinux.org/BeagleBoard#Linux_kernel

Try and do the entire build as per this or If you are looking for angstrom
http://beagleboard.org/project/angstrom/

I think you would have hit these in your efforts, But any way checking.

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Maksym Parkachov <lazy.gopher@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sujit,
>
> thanks for the links, though they mostly have to do with application
> performance. I don't have any problem with app performance as there is
> no apps running yet :)
>
> This is embedded system. There is no modules loaded, there is no
> network, there is no processes running beside busybox. Clean, fast,
> just real-time is not working :)
>
> I did check the dmesg, and unfortunately there is nothing unusual. No
> new messages after running cyclictest.
>
> I'll try to enable all kernel debugging options, but I'm not sure if
> it helps, I don't really know what to look for in the messages or in
> statistics.
>
> Cheers,
> Maksym.
>
> On 21 June 2010 12:34, Sujit K M <sjt.kar@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Searching for "kernel tuning in linux" I found some relevant but not
>> upto date articles.
>>
>> http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/146599
>> http://www.linuxforums.org/articles/linux-performance-tuning_107.html
>>
>> By the way I found something funny with your "lock_stat" gzip file. It
>> had the following warning.
>>
>> "lock_stat version 0.3
>> *WARNING* lock debugging disabled!! - possibly due to a lockdep warning"
>>
>> Also I think you could run dmesg to see the actvity for some clarity.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Maksym Parkachov <lazy.gopher@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> it's me again with beagleboard RT problem.
>>>
>>> I recompiled the kernel and got some statistics on locks, but I'm not
>>> sure how to interpret it.  Searching on google didn't help, probably,
>>> not asking right question.
>>>
>>> Here are stats from /proc after running cyclictest.
>>>
>>> If you could take a look at it, it would be great.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Maksym.
>>>
>>> On 15 June 2010 09:34, Maksym Parkachov <lazy.gopher@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for all suggestions.
>>>> I'll try with lock validation and see if I could come with more details.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Maksym.
>>>>
>>>> On 14 June 2010 13:27, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
>>>> <thebigcorporation@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 13:05 +0200, John Kacur wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Sujit K M wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y
>>>>> %<
>>>>>> His problem is not with the config.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope - the config is just fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> Turn on the lock validator and
>>>>> recompile the Kernel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then repeat the test that produced the latency spike.
>>>>>
>>>>> If that doesn't produce any locking issues,
>>>>> turn on latency tracing and repeat.
>>>>>
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
>>>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -- Sujit K M
>>
>> blog(http://kmsujit.blogspot.com/)
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>



-- 
-- Sujit K M

blog(http://kmsujit.blogspot.com/)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html