Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 31 Jul 2015 05:10:14 +0200
From:      Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>
To:        Svatopluk Kraus <onwahe@gmail.com>
Cc:        "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: [RPI-B] [HEADS UP] DWC OTG TX path optimisation for 11-current
Message-ID:  <55BAE716.7060907@selasky.org>
In-Reply-To: <55BAD963.9000808@selasky.org>
References:  <55A7D8CE.4020809@selasky.org>	<CAHNYxxMp9jGDbV-5=-cE6daR-O3eN5pdvO1s-=QfX=A9XYqYmA@mail.gmail.com>	<55B23276.8090703@selasky.org>	<CAHNYxxNc9uB62hHEv1PM9PcsGgUs=zsvNgatqLD0p%2BiiDA3Aiw@mail.gmail.com>	<55B73113.2020308@selasky.org>	<CAFHCsPVaPZpqXLS7OApa=Xz5VLnLjVpV5dYV8Pn2uHh1Lcz7Tg@mail.gmail.com>	<55B8AB76.7030603@selasky.org>	<CAFHCsPUMaYEwJsaGUFuw9yZi_5bmraSBsOYpRWvSeuebpXBJUA@mail.gmail.com>	<55B8B297.1010008@selasky.org>	<CAFHCsPVGLs8j6LAV%2Bg4rP_ueTOd8pUOupYFGvmgC3XGcJC720Q@mail.gmail.com>	<20150729154516.GH78154@funkthat.com>	<55B8F5EC.2050908@selasky.org>	<CAFHCsPXmQCKt-5xWa6XwECqFO5oz4mT9m1mPu0dKmmQ%2BG9yUAA@mail.gmail.com>	<55B9F914.7030403@selasky.org>	<CAFHCsPVzFE-a2x2rsZRshGZExwZX9dCz2hXtpb2t5LFKN-14aQ@mail.gmail.com>	<55BA1889.4040509@selasky.org>	<55BA1AC7.4050602@selasky.org> <CAFHCsPXmm8rhZpiQ4uhPCkwBKC1o5gMLFYHEj9s5e3ObU21BPg@mail.gmail.com> <55BAD963.9000808@selasky.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 07/31/15 04:11, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> Anyhow, I think that I figured out why the system has so slow response
> time when it's triggered. In general, it's not good idea to not limit
> somehow interrupt filter execution time. If something wrong is
> happening, then such filter can halt all system. I can get back fast
> system response time with attached patch. Note that it's only a
> proof-of-concept patch and it does not remove the problem. There is
> still something what generates big load when it's triggered even if
> system is 99% idle after trigger was pulled.

Hi,

If you could figure out exactly which "goto repeat" is looping, it would 
be a great help to me understand the problem. Maybe you can increase the 
counter and when it reaches the limit you can print some kind of "int 
last_goto_from", which you set before the "goto repeat;" ?

--HPS



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55BAE716.7060907>