From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262009AbVFWCCT (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:02:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261976AbVFWB7n (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:59:43 -0400 Received: from opersys.com ([64.40.108.71]:4627 "EHLO www.opersys.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261933AbVFWB6Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:58:24 -0400 Message-ID: <42BA19CB.4040300@opersys.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:09:15 -0400 From: Karim Yaghmour Reply-To: karim@opersys.com Organization: Opersys inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040805 Netscape/7.2 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, fr, fr-be, fr-ca, fr-fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Lang CC: Ingo Molnar , Bill Huey , Kristian Benoit , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@us.ibm.com, andrea@suse.de, tglx@linutronix.de, pmarques@grupopie.com, bruce@andrew.cmu.edu, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, ak@muc.de, sdietrich@mvista.com, dwalker@mvista.com, hch@infradead.org, akpm@osdl.org, rpm@xenomai.org Subject: Re: PREEMPT_RT vs I-PIPE: the numbers, part 2 References: <1119287612.6863.1.camel@localhost> <20050620183115.GA27028@nietzsche.lynx.com> <42B98B20.7020304@opersys.com> <20050622192927.GA13817@nietzsche.lynx.com> <20050622200554.GA16119@elte.hu> <42B9CC98.1040402@opersys.com> <20050622220428.GA28906@elte.hu> <42B9F673.4040100@opersys.com> <20050623000607.GB11486@elte.hu> <42BA069D.20208@opersys.com> <42BA0ED4.80207@opersys.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org David Lang wrote: > what pinout do I need to connect the printer ports For LRTBF you'll find the pinout in the README of the package. > I'm thinking that the best approach for this would be to setup a static > logger and host and then one (or more) target machines, then we can setup > a small website on the host that will allow Ingo (and others) to submit > kernels for testing, queue those kernels and then run the tests on each > one in turn (and if it runs out of kernels to test it re-tests the last > one with a longer run) Things is you're going to need one logger per target. As for a small website, that sounds good enough. Don't know how feasible it would be but it may be desirable to also have a background task that automatically checks for new releases and conducts the tests automatically. > how much needs to change in userspace between the various tests? I would > assume that between the plain, preempt, and RT kernels no userspace > changes are needed, what about the other options? There are no user-space changes needed, but you may need to install a few things that aren't there (LMbench, LTP, hackbench, etc.) > given the slow speed of these systems it would seem to make more sense to > have a full kernel downloaded to them rather then having the local box > compile it. It's your choice really, but if the tests are to be automated, then local compile shouldn't be a problem since you won't be waiting on it personally. > does this sound reasonable? For me at least. Karim -- Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546