Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:48:33 +0100 | From | Paulo Marques <> | Subject | Re: PREEMPT_RT vs I-PIPE: the numbers, part 2 |
| |
Kristian Benoit wrote: > [...] > Your analysis is correct, but with 600,000 samples, it is possible that > we got 2 peeks (perhaps not maximum), one on the logger and one on the > target. So in my point of view, the maximum value is probably somewhere > between 55us / 2 and 55us - 7us. And probably closer to 55us / 2.
I could provide some help here, by providing the schematics and firmware for having a microcontroller do the pulse timing part. The schematics should be extremely simple, and easy to build in a breadboard (no soldering required) with standard parts from electronics resellers.
With a hardware solution we could measure the *actual* target latency with sub-microsecond accuracy, and do some fun stuff too, like triggering the pulse at random intervals in a given range, etc.
The microcontroller would then connect to the logger (or the HOST in your setup, and avoid an extra computer) through a serial port to report the measurements.
Is this something that could be useful, or do you think this is just overkill?
-- Paulo Marques - www.grupopie.com
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes. Douglas Adams - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |