Project Home
Project Home		 Wiki
Wiki		 Discussion Forums
Discussions		 Project Information
Project Info
Networking/Discussion/Technology/clock_int_handler vs microkernel technology /List of Posts
BroadcastCommunity.qnx.com will be offline from May 31 6:00pm until June 2 12:00AM for upcoming system upgrades. For more information please go to https://community.qnx.com/sf/discussion/do/listPosts/projects.bazaar/discussion.bazaar.topc28418
Forum Topic - clock_int_handler vs microkernel technology : (2 Items)
   
Update
Michael Tasche
08/11/2009 8:26 AM
post35665
clock_int_handler vs microkernel technology   
Hi all, 

why do we need this interrupt-handler in the io-pkt process, which is fired by the timer-tick?

This causes an unnecessary overhead in the system.
We have a second tick-handler in a second process(io-pkt), which counts the time to fire a PULSE all 8 msec.

Why can't we use the very good timer capabilities of the kernel ?


Kind Regards
Michael
Michael Tasche
07/31/2011 4:46 AM
post87717
Re: clock_int_handler vs microkernel technology   
Just saw the latest Patch for qnx 6.5. (io-pkt)
Well, 2 years later, but they have done it.
Realtime is back, thanks very much.

-Michael


> Hi all, 
> 
> why do we need this interrupt-handler in the io-pkt process, which is fired by
>  the timer-tick?
> 
> This causes an unnecessary overhead in the system.
> We have a second tick-handler in a second process(io-pkt), which counts the 
> time to fire a PULSE all 8 msec.
> 
> Why can't we use the very good timer capabilities of the kernel ?
> 
> 
> Kind Regards
> Michael
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Return


  A subsidiary of BlackBerry             All content ©2004-2013, QNX Software Systems