globaledf

[Gedare Bloom]

Should be fine to reuse some of the same scheduler functions from the
EDF scheduler, at least initially. There may need to be some more
thought put into locking/synchronization for SMP. However, I would not
be opposed to unifying the same functions with some #ifdef SMP to
control the use of SMP features, since the EDF and global EDF use
similar logic.
-Gedare

On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Sree Harsha Konduri
<sreehars at buffalo.edu> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been going through the entry points of the simplesmp and edf scheduler
> and was thinking,
> for the globaledf scheduler entry points
> 1) if it is possible to re-use the enqueue for the rbtree
> 2) modify the schedule, initialize and extract based on the functionality of
> smp scheduler,
>
> Since the enqueue and update in globaledf uses only inserts into the rbtree,
> where as the schedule and initialize needs to be modified since i will use a
> chain of executing tasks.
>
> Your comments will be helpful.
>
> Thanks,
> Sree Harsha
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org> wrote:
>>
>> Good I think you are on track.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Sree Harsha Konduri
>> <sreehars at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I have the globalEDF template up, so this week i will try to examine the
>> > current smp scheduler, in terms of scheduler and thread data structures
>> > and
>> > also functions, and come up with an algorithm or flow chart describing
>> > the
>> > entry points to the new scheduler.
>> >
>> > I will update the tasks document and also post the link to the blog at
>> > the
>> > earliest.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Sree
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 6:47 AM, Sree Harsha Konduri
>> > <sreehars at buffalo.edu>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> As disscussed earlier in the week, i have a GlobalEDF scheduler
>> >> template
>> >> with the same functionality of the simplesmp scheduler.
>> >> I've tested it with some of the smp tests using rtems-testing.
>> >>
>> >> In order to test with rtems-schedsim do i have to configure
>> >> rtems-schedsim
>> >> again from scratch? since there are changes to the cpukit with added
>> >> header
>> >> files.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Harsha
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Joel Sherrill
>> >> <Joel.Sherrill at oarcorp.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> You have added a .h file. You need to run bootstrap -p and bootstrap
>> >>> in
>> >>> cpukit.
>> >>>
>> >>> Do that followed by a build from scratch and see if it helps
>> >>>
>> >>> Sree Harsha Konduri <sreehars at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I do have auto tools in my Path. After i do configure with
>> >>> --enable-maintainer-mode i cant see the Makefile.in refreshing, or new
>> >>> headers being included.
>> >>> So i ran bootstrap with -c to clear all the auto tools generated
>> >>> files.
>> >>> Now when i re run bootstrap with -p only preinstall.am gets generated
>> >>> and
>> >>> after configure with --enable-maintainer-mode there is no Makefile.in
>> >>> generated?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Harsha
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 6:05 AM, Ralf Corsepius
>> >>> <ralf.corsepius at rtems.org> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 06/21/2013 03:07 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Cc:rtems-devel
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> When modifying the build system i.e. Makefile.am files, you need to
>> >>>>> rerun the bootstrap script and maybe with the -p flag if you add new
>> >>>>> header files. Run bootstrap in the nearest directory to the modified
>> >>>>> Makefile.am that contains a configure.ac <http://configure.ac> file.
>> >>>>> Then recompile rtems.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Make sure to have RTEMS autoconf and automake in $PATH,
>> >>>> then pass --enable-maintainer-mode to configure
>> >>>> then running make will automatically take care about this in most
>> >>>> cases.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ralf
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>
>