Re: SMTC support status in latest git head.

[Anoop P A <anoop.pa@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 1:00 AM, Kevin D. Kissell <kevink@paralogos.com> wrote:
>
> Would this still be with a "tickful" kernel?  I was able to run some
> experiments on a Malta over the weekend, using mostly default
> Malta defconfig options including tickless operation.  The 2.6.32.27
> build comes up with both VPEs and all TCs firing.  2.6.36.2 with
> the stackframe.h patch boots all the way up on a single VPE, but
> VERY slowly - as if the Clock/Compare setups weren't being done
> correctly and timer intervals were waiting the full Count register
> rollover cycle.  I've been looking at diffs, and merged one change
> that was made to cevt-r4k.c into the analogous routine in cevt-smtc.c
> (no change), but there's clearly more breakage to the SMTC/Malta
> configuration post-2.6.32 than just the stackframe.h patch.  Going
> tickful may work around it, but tickful+SMTC is grossly inefficient.

Yes that is true my configuration is using tickful . I had reported this
issue with tickless kernel . I think you missed my last email. I will
resend.

Thanks
Anoop
>
>            Regards,
>
>            Kevin K.
>
>
>
>
>