On 08/30/2015 10:33 PM, Konstantinos Chalas wrote: > It wasn't innocuous... The variable uint64_t diff was used to store the > latency, which in turn took the value -1 because of the timer > calibration issue ,
Which is innocuous. It only means that you got a task rescheduling early by a microsecond once due to the incorrect calibration. This does not reveal any malfunction. therefore when casted as unsigned produced 2^64-1. > It works as it should after running autotune. > > Thank you very much for the help, > Konstantinos > > On 08/28/2015 03:22 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: >> On 08/28/2015 03:13 PM, Konstantinos Chalas wrote: >>> No, besides a negative lat best value, like this: >>> >>> RTH|----lat min|----lat avg|----lat max|-overrun|---msw|---lat >>> best|--lat worst >>> RTD| 1.080| 3.013| 40.080| 0| 0| >>> -1.275| 43.961 >> Ok, that one is innocuous, this is only a timer calibration issue. The >> strange average value may be an issue in cyclictest since 2147483647 is >> 2^31-1, which is INT32_MAX. A bit like no sample had been recorded >> during such run. >> >>> On 08/28/2015 02:59 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>> On 08/28/2015 02:51 PM, Konstantinos Chalas wrote: >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> root@beaglebone:~# uname -a >>>>> Linux beaglebone 3.14.44+ #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed Aug 26 23:41:20 CEST 2015 >>>>> armv7l GNU/Linux >>>>> >>>>> and ipipe-core-3.14.44-arm-12 >>>>> >>>> Do you have any weird values appearing during a standard latency test? >>>> e.g. >>>> >>>> # latency [-t0] >>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>> On 08/28/2015 02:46 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>>>> 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
