[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: 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

    Paulo Marques -

    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
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-06-23 16:53    [W:0.021 / U:11.980 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site