Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:47:58 +0100 (MET) | From | Esben Nielsen <> | Subject | Re: Priority Inheritance Test (Real-Time Preemption) |
| |
Ok, I'll try to grab -30-7 and work on from there. I am working on variable dependency chains (locking tree depth). I'll try to send it as a patch to -30-7. But I must admit it is very hard for me to follow all your patches, getting them down, compiling etc: Once I am up running on the newest version you have already sent out the next! :-)
Esben
On Tue, 23 Nov 2004, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > > > > > > From realfeel I wrote a small, simple test to test how well priority > > > inheritance mechanism works. > > > > cool - this is a really useful testsuite. > > FYI, i've put the 'blocker device' kernel code into the current -RT > patch (-30-7). This makes it possible to build it on SMP (which didnt > work when it was a module), and generally makes it easier to do testing > via pi_test. > > The only change needed on the userspace pi_test side was to add -O2 to > the CFLAGS in the Makefile to make the loop() timings equivalent, and to > remove the module compilations. I've added a .config option for it too > and cleaned up the code. > > Ingo > - > 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/ >
- 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/
| |