From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23992 invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2007 20:05:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 22934 invoked by uid 22791); 16 Aug 2007 20:04:53 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.gmx.net (HELO mail.gmx.net) (213.165.64.20) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with SMTP; Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:04:49 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 16 Aug 2007 20:04:46 -0000 Received: from chello080108088192.14.11.tuwien.teleweb.at (EHLO [192.168.0.156]) [80.108.88.192] by mail.gmx.net (mp058) with SMTP; 16 Aug 2007 22:04:46 +0200 X-Authenticated: #979605 Message-ID: <46C4ADE6.9080101@gmx.at> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:05:00 -0000 From: Alois Zoitl User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070606) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: eCos Disuss References: <20070807140234.264490@gmx.net> <20070807144047.GF14598@lunn.ch> <20070808075810.250840@gmx.net> <20070808081015.GB29246@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20070808081015.GB29246@lunn.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: Re: [ECOS] Thread activation disturbed by lower priority threads] X-SW-Source: 2007-08/txt/msg00080.txt.bz2 Hi, thanks you definitely pointed me into the right direction. The problem is located with the mutexes. I removed all mutexes in questions and set my timing measurement points directly after the semaphore that is in charge of activating my threads.After making more measurements and playing a little bit around I found it that when I set the priority inversion protocol to none (using cyg_mutex_set_protocol). The timing is as expected. So I thought it could be that before I was using priority ceiling which would be an explanation for the delay as every time a mutex is gathered the thread will get priorty 0. So I changed to priority inheritance. This from my point of view should do the job as I like to have it done. But when using priority inheritance I get the same bad timing as in the beginning. And as longer I think I don't know why the tread activation of the highest priority thread is prolonged by threads holding a mutex with priority inheritance where each of the treads that my also get this mutex has a lower priority. So I'm completly confuesed. Any Ideas what could be the problem or what I could do? For my current tests no priority inversion protocol is just fine, but for further more complected tests I think i will need something like priority inheritance so it would be nice to have it. Thanks, Alois -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss