On 08/28/2015 02:37 PM, Konstantinos Chalas wrote: > Great! Now, it is much better! Thanks for the interest. > > I have noticed something else, when using clock_nanosleep, there is > something wrong going on. Example output with clock_nanosleep: > > root@beaglebone:~# cyclictest -p 99 -i 250 -n > # /dev/cpu_dma_latency set to 0us > policy: fifo: loadavg: 1.13 1.18 1.15 1/243 2385 > > T: 0 ( 2384) P:99 I:250 C: 122168 Min: 0 Act: 9 *Avg:2147483647* > Max: -1 > > The Avg value jumps to this insane number. > I didn't find any differences between the vanilla cyclictest and the > xenomai-2.6 upstream cyclictest regarding the use of clock_nanosleep. > Any ideas of where this behaviour would come from?
Which kernel and I-pipe release are you running? -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai mailing list Xenomai@xenomai.org http://xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai
