From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Philippe Gerum In-Reply-To: <1282667450.1961.132.camel@domain.hid> References: <4C73EC62.80703@domain.hid> <1282667450.1961.132.camel@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:44:37 +0200 Message-ID: <1282668277.1961.139.camel@domain.hid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] [Adeos-main] [RFT] ipipe patch for 2.6.35.3-x86 List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: xenomai-help , adeos-main On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 18:30 +0200, Philippe Gerum wrote: > On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 17:59 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > Hi, > > > > just uploaded a forward port of the 2.6.34 ipipe patch for x86 to latest > > stable 2.6.35.3. It boots and runs fine here in 64-bit mode with Xenomai > > head, but I only ran light tests so far. Anyone interested in upgrading > > the host kernel (I think I read some request recently) is welcome to > > give it a try and report results back (specifically on 32 bit as that is > > a bit out of focus for me ATM). You can download the full git tree from > > > > git://git.kiszka.org/ipipe-2.6.git queues/2.6.35-x86 > > (alternatively also via http://) > > > > Looking forward to feedback, > > The comment and the relevant code for 82a7dd3df needs fixing: all > pipeline ports should expose 4 IPIs, named IPIPE_SERVICE_IPI[0-3]. > powerpc/SMP has one more up to 2.6.34, but IPI4 will disappear in > 2.6.35. The upcoming arm/SMP port conforms to this requirement as well. > Those are merely pipelined IPI channels, the way the arch-dep section > manages to multiplex them (or not) over the available hw channel(s) is > of course unspecified. The virtual IPI numbers are also unspecified. Actually, the more I think of it, the less I see the value of checking the parameter passed to such an internal call like __ipipe_send_ipi(). There is no user interaction with this code. So removing the test is indeed better. > > Nitpicking: if you intend to push this material to me at some point, > please make sure to prefix commit subject lines with 'ipipe:' for the > -noarch section, and 'x86/ipipe:' for the rest. I'm a grep fanboy, and > this 'tends' to conform to linux mainline as well. > > > Jan > > > -- Philippe.