Hi again,
I take 'there are still some quirks in the system' as 'I don't know'
as I said I will set up a box and check the latencies, there have
been a lot of work on RT-Preempt, and I would say that the MP problem
is solved and most work now is for device drivers and filesystems, (
locking
Feature Requests item #2842117, was opened at 2009-08-21 13:03
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by cradek
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=356744&aid=2842117&group_id=6744
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the
Feature Requests item #3067217, was opened at 2010-09-15 19:42
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by cradek
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=356744&aid=3067217&group_id=6744
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the
Michael Büsch wrote:
> I got it below 20 microseconds when I last tested it with the patches I
> posted.
> However, there were still some quirks as in certain actions in the
> system
> induced huge latency spikes. However, if one doesn't do those
> activities,
>
20 us is not bad, but would likel
Nothing jumps out at me in the source.
After make clean && make:
m...@mark:/opt/src/emc2-dev$ ./bin/rs274
./bin/rs274: symbol lookup error: ./bin/rs274: undefined symbol:
_ZN6InterpC1Ev
m...@mark:/opt/src/emc2-dev$ c++filt _ZN6InterpC1Ev
Interp::Interp()
m...@mark:/opt/src/emc2-dev$ git pull
Alre
Bugs item #3067217, was opened at 2010-09-16 00:42
Message generated for change (Tracker Item Submitted) made by
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=106744&aid=3067217&group_id=6744
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment t
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:48:48AM -0400, John Kasunich wrote:
> I propose that we verify that they are not
> used,
> and if not, we deprecate them, and remove them from rtapi.h and all of
> the wrappers. The code will always be there in git if we need it some
> day.
>
> Comments?
By all means,
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 12:16 -0500, Jon Elson wrote:
> Lars Segerlund wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a question about EMC and the underlying realtime kernel, since
> > the Linux RT-Preempt patches are 'almost' included in the mainline
> > now, is there any effort to port EMC to this platform ?
>
Lars Segerlund wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a question about EMC and the underlying realtime kernel, since
> the Linux RT-Preempt patches are 'almost' included in the mainline
> now, is there any effort to port EMC to this platform ?
>
Have you checked the interrupt latency performance of the RT-
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 08:11 +0200, Lars Segerlund wrote:
> I have a question about EMC and the underlying realtime kernel, since
> the Linux RT-Preempt patches are 'almost' included in the mainline
> now, is there any effort to port EMC to this platform ?
http://bu3sch.de/patches/emc-linux-rt/LAT
The email about RT-Preempt got me reading through rtapi.h for the first
time in years. The API contains functions for manipulating semaphores
and fifos, but I believe HAL and EMC have never used them. As a result,
they have probably bitrotted. In addition, implementing them is extra
work for som
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:11 +0200, "Lars Segerlund"
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a question about EMC and the underlying realtime kernel, since
> the Linux RT-Preempt patches are 'almost' included in the mainline
> now, is there any effort to port EMC to this platform ?
>
> Also does anybody hav
12 matches
Mail list logo
