Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 14 Jul 1997 17:11:13 -0600
From:      Steve Passe <smp@csn.net>
To:        Bob Bishop <rb@gid.co.uk>
Cc:        hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: interrupt latency 
Message-ID:  <199707142311.RAA01616@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 14 Jul 1997 23:26:41 BST." <l0302090caff057b0d7a9@[194.32.164.2]> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

> >> A digital output port and an oscilloscope, logic analyser or something
> >> similar. Any other (ie non-hardware) method is just inviting confusion.
> [...]
> >... and the 4th
> >CPU could service the real INTs almost as fast as they occur.
>                                  ^^^^^^
>                                  ||||||
> 
> As I was saying... :-)

but for this scheme that delay is irrelevant, as I can time exactly
the difference from the point that the '4th CPU' sends the INT via
the APIC bus and the time the ISR is completed.  think of the 4th CPU 
as a very intelligent IO APIC that can record (once tied to specific
software) all the timings of the INT events.

--
Steve Passe	| powered by
smp@csn.net	|            Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199707142311.RAA01616>