Hi Jan,

Actually it was  "clear" for me after reading some examples such
as kernel/drivers/testing/rtdmtest.c.

Btw examples deal only with ioctl and I don't understand how it could work
for read/write (any example around??).

regards



Le lun. 23 sept. 2019 à 15:10, Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> a écrit :

> On 20.09.19 16:23, Pierre FICHEUX wrote:
> > Thx for the answer bu I don't understand the first sentence (because of
> my  bad
> > english :))
> >
> > What dou you mean with "Xenomai 3 prefers the RT patch of a RTDM
> callback over
> > the NRT if the caller is
> > a real-time task." ? What is a "patch of RTDM callback" ??
>
> I actually have to correct myself: Since "cobalt/syscalls: allow for
> handing
> over mode selection to syscall handlers" (predates v3.0.3), RTDM entry
> points
> are supposed to have to original behavior again (call driver handler
> corresponding to current caller mode first, then switch if handler returns
> -ENOSYS).
>
> Maybe we need to look into your concrete case again if something else
> changes
> the migration pattern.
>
> Jan
>
> >
> > Le ven. 20 sept. 2019 à 15:45, Jan Kiszka <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
> >
> >     On 20.09.19 15:34, Pierre FICHEUX via Xenomai wrote:
> >      > Hi all,
> >      >
> >      > I've been using RTDM _rt / _nrt functions for a long time with
> Xenomai
> >      > 2.6.x but it seems not to work (the same way ?) with Xenomai 3
> (tested with
> >      > several versions up to 3.0.8). Actually the _nrt driver function
> is never
> >      > called (_rt is always called...). I wrote a simple example for
> Xeno 2 and
> >      > Xeno 3 available here:
> >      >
> >      > https://github.com/pficheux/xenomai_examples.git
> >      >
> >      > Here is the test on Raspberry Pi 3 (Xeno 3).
> >      >
> >      > # insmod rtdm_test.ko
> >      >
> >      > # ./xenomai_test
> >      >
> >      > [   47.661245] RTDM open:.
> >      >
> >      > [   47.667473] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   47.672674] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   48.667479] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   48.678078] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   49.667463] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   49.683076] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   50.667463] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [   50.687868] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > Of course it works fine with Xenomai 2 (on Pi B+) :
> >      >
> >      > # insmod rtdm_test.ko
> >      >
> >      > # ./xenomai_test
> >      >
> >      > [  753.614275] RTDM open
> >      >
> >      > [  753.632852] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [  753.636779] ioctl: NRT
> >      >
> >      > [  755.632839] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [  755.640252] ioctl: NRT
> >      >
> >      > [  756.632841] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [  757.632838] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > [  757.643779] ioctl: NRT
> >      >
> >      > [  758.632836] ioctl: RT
> >      >
> >      > Thx by advance for your help
> >      >
> >
> >     Xenomai 3 prefers the RT patch of a RTDM callback over the NRT if
> the caller is
> >     a real-time task. Xenomai 2 had an adaptive behavior where the
> current state of
> >     the caller defined that. This is a problem I also ran into before
> and proposed
> >     to revert to the old behavior (in fact, we do that in one internal
> deployment).
> >     But there is also the point that preferring RT over NRT makes sense
> for many
> >     scenarios.
> >
> >     Discussing this with Philippe back then on the list (I do not find
> the
> >     reference
> >     ATM), we came to the conclusion that the better answer is to allow
> the
> >     driver to
> >     declare which particular behavior a callback should have - in
> contrast to doing
> >     that in one way or the other at the top level, ie. on syscall entry
> of ioctl
> >     etc. But I do not have a design for that yet, and I didn't want to
> delay the
> >     3.1
> >     release further to finish that first.
> >
> >     What we could consider for 3.1 is adding a compile-time configurable
> to
> >     re-enable the old behavior at syscall level when a user needs it.
> Then we could
> >     later on (3.2) push that properly to the driver level and remove the
> control
> >     again.
> >
> >     Jan
> >
> >     --
> >     Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA IOT SES-DE
> >     Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Pierre FICHEUX -/- CTO Smile ECS, France -\[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> >                               http://www.smile.fr  <http://www.smile.fr/
> >
> >                               https://smile.eu/fr/offres/embarque-iot
> > I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code
> >
>
> --
> Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA IOT SES-DE
> Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
>


-- 

Pierre FICHEUX -/- CTO Smile ECS, France -\- [email protected]
                             http://www.smile.fr
                             https://smile.eu/fr/offres/embarque-iot
I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code

Reply via email to