[LITMUS^RT] litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 8
Ricardo Teixeira
ricardo.btxr at gmail.com
Sun May 19 22:57:21 CEST 2019
Hi Björn,
I'd like to send these changes made to the ft2csv code, but I'm not sure
about the impacts on the suspension-based protocols. I have not tested
these protocols.
Best regards,
Ricardo
Em sex, 17 de mai de 2019 às 03:53, <litmus-dev-request at lists.litmus-rt.org>
escreveu:
> Send litmus-dev mailing list submissions to
> litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.litmus-rt.org/listinfo/litmus-dev
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> litmus-dev-request at lists.litmus-rt.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> litmus-dev-owner at lists.litmus-rt.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of litmus-dev digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 7 (Ricardo Teixeira)
> 2. Re: litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 7 (Björn Brandenburg)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 23:24:00 -0300
> From: Ricardo Teixeira <ricardo.btxr at gmail.com>
> To: litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> Subject: Re: [LITMUS^RT] litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 7
> Message-ID:
> <
> CADjj2cGtt9aGviCPZPpbdO0a957+xvMz74bEubVXbLK+2usVig at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Björn,
>
> UNLOCK overhead records continued to be incomplete, even without the -i
> parameter. Debugging the ft2csv code, I noticed that it is coming out of
> the loop in the statement below:
>
>
> https://github.com/LITMUS-RT/feather-trace-tools/blob/master/src/ft2csv.c#L156
>
> By modifying this piece of code, I was able to retrieve the records.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Ricardo
>
> Em qui, 16 de mai de 2019 às 17:46, <
> litmus-dev-request at lists.litmus-rt.org>
> escreveu:
>
> > Send litmus-dev mailing list submissions to
> > litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> >
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > https://lists.litmus-rt.org/listinfo/litmus-dev
> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > litmus-dev-request at lists.litmus-rt.org
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > litmus-dev-owner at lists.litmus-rt.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of litmus-dev digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> > 1. Re: P-RES: waking up tasks before timeout (Björn Brandenburg)
> > 2. Re: litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 5 (Björn Brandenburg)
> > 3. Overheads (Martinez Garcia Jorge Luis (PS-EC/ESB2))
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 12:17:41 +0200
> > From: Björn Brandenburg <bbb at mpi-sws.org>
> > To: litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> > Subject: Re: [LITMUS^RT] P-RES: waking up tasks before timeout
> > Message-ID: <55682065-9CC1-4992-8D9D-B2E45966C0CD at mpi-sws.org>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 16. May 2019, at 11:32, Julien Haibach <julien.haibach at yahoo.de>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > currently I am working on a mode change implementation, on top of the
> > P-RES plugin.
> > > In the case of a mode change, tasks sleeping may need to be woken up
> > before their previous mode release time.
> > >
> > > On job completion tasks are put asleep with
> > > schedule_hrtimeout(&next_release, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS);
> > > the task state is TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE - litmus/jobs.c:147
> > >
> > > So my question is what is the best way to wake up a sleeping task in
> > this plugin?
> > > I tried to call wake_up_process() from the plugin, but this did not
> work
> > out of the box.
> > >
> >
> > Hi Julien,
> >
> > these are standard Linux interfaces, so the regular methods apply. For
> > instance, interruptible tasks can be woken up prematurely by a signal.
> > Thus, presumably there are APIs for waking sleeping tasks early to
> > implement signal delivery. I’d investigate that code path (or read
> through
> > the various wake-up wrappers) to find the right API to use.
> >
> > Best,
> > Björn
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> > Name: smime.p7s
> > Type: application/pkcs7-signature
> > Size: 5061 bytes
> > Desc: not available
> > URL: <
> >
> http://lists.litmus-rt.org/pipermail/litmus-dev/attachments/20190516/5f1a084b/attachment-0001.bin
> > >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 12:21:52 +0200
> > From: Björn Brandenburg <bbb at mpi-sws.org>
> > To: litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> > Subject: Re: [LITMUS^RT] litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 5
> > Message-ID: <087E2F91-462C-460E-8165-EDECE0E6F4A0 at mpi-sws.org>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> >
> >
> >
> > > On 16. May 2019, at 04:16, Ricardo Teixeira <ricardo.btxr at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The -x parameter did not bring the records relative to UNLOCK as you
> > said. Looking at ftdump records, I noticed that the UNLOCK_START and
> > UNLOCK_END records are interleaved by SCHED and SCHED2 records (see
> below).
> > Could this be why these records are not being counted?
> >
> > Unless you are using the -i option, this should not make a difference.
> >
> > - Björn
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> > Name: smime.p7s
> > Type: application/pkcs7-signature
> > Size: 5061 bytes
> > Desc: not available
> > URL: <
> >
> http://lists.litmus-rt.org/pipermail/litmus-dev/attachments/20190516/51e8a3e0/attachment-0001.bin
> > >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Message: 3
> > Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 20:45:23 +0000
> > From: "Martinez Garcia Jorge Luis (PS-EC/ESB2)"
> > <JorgeLuis.MartinezGarcia at de.bosch.com>
> > To: "litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org" <litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org>
> > Subject: [LITMUS^RT] Overheads
> > Message-ID: <f87dc7aaa9464c66b526b04f88bd9c0f at de.bosch.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > Dear Björn,
> > I'm currently trying to compare scheduling overheads under different
> > schedulers. To that end, I would like to understand the overhead name
> > convention used in Litmus. After computing some statistics by means of
> > ft-compute-stats, I can see the following categories: CXS, RELEASE,
> > RELEASE-LATENCY, SCHED2, SCHED, and SEND-RESCHED.
> > Please correct me, if I am wrong, I assume that CXS accounts for the
> > overhead related to process switching (context-switch overhead) and
> SCHED +
> > SCHED2 for process selection (scheduling overhead).
> > Do RELEASE and RELEASE-LATENCY account for the execution of a release ISR
> > (release overhead) and the delay until the release ISR starts execution
> > (event latency)?
> > What does SEND-RESCHED account for?
> > Once a job is completed there is some kind of overhead involved like the
> > one related to the trap generated by its completion, does this overhead
> > fall under one of those categories?
> > Best,
> > Jorge
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> >
> http://lists.litmus-rt.org/pipermail/litmus-dev/attachments/20190516/dc200284/attachment.html
> > >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > litmus-dev mailing list
> > litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> > https://lists.litmus-rt.org/listinfo/litmus-dev
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 7
> > *****************************************
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.litmus-rt.org/pipermail/litmus-dev/attachments/20190516/99e662b9/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 17 May 2019 08:52:03 +0200
> From: Björn Brandenburg <bbb at mpi-sws.org>
> To: litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> Subject: Re: [LITMUS^RT] litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 7
> Message-ID: <12B2773B-46CB-4422-8274-3ACFE7D8037A at mpi-sws.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>
> > On 17. May 2019, at 04:24, Ricardo Teixeira <ricardo.btxr at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > UNLOCK overhead records continued to be incomplete, even without the -i
> parameter. Debugging the ft2csv code, I noticed that it is coming out of
> the loop in the statement below:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/LITMUS-RT/feather-trace-tools/blob/master/src/ft2csv.c#L156
> >
> > By modifying this piece of code, I was able to retrieve the records.
>
> Dear Ricardo,
>
> thanks for sharing your find. If you’d like to submit a patch that makes
> this behavior optional via a command-line argument, I’d be happy to merge
> it.
>
> Best,
> Björn
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: smime.p7s
> Type: application/pkcs7-signature
> Size: 5061 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL: <
> http://lists.litmus-rt.org/pipermail/litmus-dev/attachments/20190517/6cc14ff3/attachment.bin
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> litmus-dev mailing list
> litmus-dev at lists.litmus-rt.org
> https://lists.litmus-rt.org/listinfo/litmus-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of litmus-dev Digest, Vol 81, Issue 8
> *****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.litmus-rt.org/pipermail/litmus-dev/attachments/20190519/417d4b98/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the litmus-dev
mailing list