update: ppc IRQ blocking.

update: ppc IRQ blocking.

[Iain Sandoe]

Hi,

Well, much of the info presented in my message yesterday was bogus...

The instrumentation needs improvement... it's missing too many cases where
IRQs are switched on/off behind the back of the measurement (which is making
it very difficult to narrow down the rogue...)

I'm working on it.

The latency measurements *do* indicate a problem... I don't think that is
bogus.. but...

So unless:
(a) you have an idea where there might be a 8 to 10ms hold off in IRQ or
(b) you already have an IRQ blocking measurement set that includes all the
cases (in which case I'd love a copy ;-)

Ignore the post of yesterday...
Iain.

P.S. Jun - do you want a copy of what I've got so far? or wait 'till it's
done... I covered a lot more cases but still need to deal with all the stuff
going on in head.S :-(


** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: update: ppc IRQ blocking.

[Jun Sun]

Iain Sandoe wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Well, much of the info presented in my message yesterday was bogus...
>
> The instrumentation needs improvement... it's missing too many cases where
> IRQs are switched on/off behind the back of the measurement (which is making
> it very difficult to narrow down the rogue...)
>
> I'm working on it.
>

I had a port to PPC that runs embedded planet RPX lite ???.  It ran
pretty OK.  Is this test done with my port or somebody else's port?  I
don't remember I released my port, although it is something on my todo
list ...


>
> P.S. Jun - do you want a copy of what I've got so far? or wait 'till it's
> done... I covered a lot more cases but still need to deal with all the stuff
> going on in head.S :-(

Sure.  I'd happy to take a look of it and perhaps integrate it into my
PPC port - if I ever get to do it.

Jun

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/