[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:0.150 / U:4.884 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site