Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 Jul 1999 09:54:42 +0100 (BST)
From:      Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>
To:        Seigo Tanimura <tanimura@naklab.dnj.ynu.ac.jp>
Cc:        julian@whistle.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Rewriting pca(4) using finetimer(9) (was: Re: MPU401 now works under New Midi Driver Framework with a Fine Timer)
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.10.9907080952480.558-100000@salmon.nlsystems.com>
In-Reply-To: <199907080617.PAA23884@rina.naklab.dnj.ynu.ac.jp>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Seigo Tanimura wrote:

> On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 19:46:38 -0700 (PDT),
>   Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com> said:
> 
> julian> With your scheme the clock needs to be always running at elevated speed. 
> julian> Possibly you might have a startup routine that turns on the elevated
> julian> frequency, (basically does an 'aquire_timer0()' )  I would say that you
> julian> would have more success in implementing your finetimer() by using
> julian> "aquiretimer0" than the other way around. 
> 
> I agree that acquire_timer0() would give more freedom to the ticks
> to callout. Then I tried figuring out how to manage multiple
> callouts using acquire_timer0(), which is something like below.
> 
> 
> Let C the callout queue, and c_i a callout. (0 <= i < I) Next define f(c_i) as
> the callout function of c_i, and dt_rem(c_i) the time span between c_(i-1) and
> c_i. (dt_rem(c_-1) is defined as zero) We use the time span to avoid traversing
> though the queue to update the time tags on the callouts.
> 
> (footnote: I'd better write in TeX :-<)
> 
> Queueing a new callout c' to be made in t' involves a problem to find the
> maximum j (which is an integer, j >= 0) satisfying a constraint
> 
> 	t' > \sum_(k=0)^(j) dt_rem(c_k)
> 
> where the right hand side of the inequality is the time span after which
> the callout c_k is made. Then c' is inserted after c_j and new dt_rem(c_(j+1))
> and dt_rem(c_(j+2)) are determined. Now we can acquire_timer0() with dt_rem(c_0).
> 
> In clkintr(), we dequeue c_0 from C, and make a callout to f(c_0). Then
> acquire_timer0() is called once more with the new dt_rem(c_0). dt_rem(c_i) is
> the difference of callout times, so they need not be updated on every clkintr().
> 
> 
> Although the computational cost in clkintr() is generaly O(1), the queueing cost
> is O(I). Not sure whether we can reduce it or not (will it really make a trouble?)
> 
> 
> How does it sound?

If I understand this correctly, you are suggesting that we program timer0
so that we only take interrupts when a finetimer is due to fire? If so,
then it sounds very good. The idea of taking 6000+ interrupts/sec made me
uneasy, even though most would return without doing any work.

--
Doug Rabson				Mail:  dfr@nlsystems.com
Nonlinear Systems Ltd.			Phone: +44 181 442 9037




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9907080952480.558-100000>