Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » Working on the Scherzo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Working on the Scherzo [message #100526 is a reply to message #100515] |
Wed, 01 October 2008 17:56 |
|
Very cool..
"Mike Audet" <mike@...> wrote:
>
>Hi All,
>
>I just thought I'd post an update. I've compiled the Scherzo and I'm running
>the verison I complied. I've been working through the design changes I
need
>to make. This kernel mode stuff is tricky. But, I thnink I've got a dresign
>that will work. It might just take a couple of weeks to get a build out
>that we can test.
>
>Things are moving forward.
>
>All the best,
>
>Mike
|
|
|
|
Re: Working on the Scherzo [message #100531 is a reply to message #100520] |
Thu, 02 October 2008 04:22 |
Mike Audet
Messages: 294 Registered: December 2008
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Kerry,
The Scherzo is a perfect and efficient design as long as you've only got
one cpu. I'm almost certain I've found the multi-cpu bug in the scherzo.
It's complicated, but it relates to the app enabling an interrupt on one
cpu when it needs to be masked by another. When there is only one cpu, the
app can't do this because the Scherzo is running and blocking out the app.
With more than one cpu, the scherzo expects it to be the only thing running,
and the other cpu messes up its operation.
It's really a minor redesign, but it's a big deal for me because I've never
worked in kernel mode before.
I'm going to do it in two stages.
1) move the DPC code into the ISR, which means I will have to use the interrupt
spin lock to guard the various queues.
2) replace the queues with newer designs that will allow for not using the
interrupt spin lock all over the place.
3) (maybe) break up the work of the old DPC and put some of it in a new DPC
to improve system efficiency (this might not be necessary).
It's tricky stuff, but we'll get there.
All the best,
Mike
KerryGalloway <kg@kerrygalloway.com> wrote:
>Mike, it's just amazing to see this. This is every bit as much a
>landmark moment for the "post-discontinuation" life of the platform as
>porting Scherzo to XP was in the first place.
>
>It raises a bunch of questions - did you decide to take it "object
>oriented", or are you concentrating on cleanup? How deep are the design
>changes?
>
>And aside from the aesthetics - meaning the "objective good" of
>cleaning up dodgy or outdated code - what are your end-goal aims? What
>do you hope will be addressed or enabled as far as end users are
>concerned?
>
>- Kerry
>
>On 2008-10-01 05:15:14 -0700, "Mike Audet" <mike@...> said:
>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I just thought I'd post an update. I've compiled the Scherzo and I'm
running
>> the verison I complied. I've been working through the design changes
I need
>> to make. This kernel mode stuff is tricky. But, I thnink I've got a
dresign
>> that will work. It might just take a couple of weeks to get a build out
>> that we can test.
>>
>> Things are moving forward.
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Mike
>
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Dec 18 11:26:13 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01137 seconds
|