Re: RTAI 5.0.1 calibrate program: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at 00007ffe78e450f0 (Paolo Mantegazza)

Hi List,

With respect to the below problem.  We have used the CONTRIB branch which
Paolo mentioned (I had thought he pointed to the same tarball as the
release).

We are getting unacceptably high latencies with an i3 6100 7th generation
CPU and are wondering whether we should downgrade to a CPU that doesn't
have SMI.

Has anyone else encountered latency issues like this?

We can provide more information if required.

Thanks,

Vivian


>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 17:42:43 +0200
> From: Paolo Mantegazza <[email protected]>
> To: Rtai <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Rtai] RTAI 5.0.1 calibrate program: BUG: unable to
>         handle kernel paging request at 00007ffe78e450f0
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"
>
> Ciao,
> please, beware of trolls. They are amusing, at times, but often they do
> not know what they are talking about.
>
> The problem of calibration faults has been solved by the end of
> May-2017, thanks to a cooperation with Josef (A?falg).
> The fix is
> in"https://www.rtai.org/userfiles/downloads/RTAICONTRIB/rtai-5.0.1.tar.bz2
> ",
> to be 5.1, when we'll get a new RTAI repository, hopefully soon.
>
> If you want to know more about it have a look at the following May-2017
> threads on the RTAI mailing list:
> https://mail.rtai.org/pipermail/rtai/2017-May/027461.html
> https://mail.rtai.org/pipermail/rtai/2017-May/027502.html
>
> Paolo
>
> On 09/19/2017 05:01 AM, Alec Ari wrote:
> > I'm not sure why Paolo treats his RTAI 5.0.1 release like gold. It's got
> tons of issues, everything from hard-locks, overruns, and extreme latency
> spikes. Not sure where he got the idea that it's so brilliant and to always
> grab the latest versions of his (ripped-off) code. RTAI 4.0.1 which I've
> based my stable tree of off has absolutely no issues.
> >
> > Myself and many others (LinuxCNC) have been using this tree for the past
> few years and it's fine:
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/NTULINUX/RTAI
> >
> > Don't use the drop-legacy branch, it's not ready and I'm still ironing
> out all the bugs that Paolo introduced into the scheduler and
> self-calibration. The old calibration code worked so much better, literally
> "just works." RTAI 5 is not ready for production and is not stable by any
> means. I highly suggest avoiding anything above 5.0 until there's some more
> confirmed cases of it working in upcoming releases.
> >
> > I've been doing kernel development for over a decade and this is not
> user-error.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rtai mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.rtai.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rtai
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://mail.rtai.org/pipermail/rtai/attachments/
> 20170919/5adf2dc1/attachment-0001.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 22:04:56 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Alec Ari <[email protected]>
> To: Rtai <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Rtai] RTAI 5.0.1 calibrate program: BUG: unable to
>         handle kernel paging request at 00007ffe78e450f0
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I'm lost for words, Paolo actually replied to something I said.
>
>
> So use the RTAI 5.0.1 tarball from the users repository instead of the one
> in the releases, you say? The one with "ifdef CONFIG_RTAI_USE_STACK_ARGS"
> scattered about? You do realize that CONFIG_RTAI_USE_STACK_ARGS is an
> undefined config option that has no meaning, not in Kconfig or
> configure.in anywhere?
>
>
> If you think I'm trolling, you should look at yourself. Stealing my code
> and writing the sloppiest crap to almost purposely make it confusing.
>
> Like what the hell is this, seriously:
>
> { if (ipipe_notifier_enabled_p(current)) return ((int (*)(unsigned long,
> void *))ipipe_root_domain->legacy.handlers[exception])(exception, regs);
> } {
>
> I've said it before and I'll say it again; your work really belongs in the
> obfuscated C code contest. This project would be dead without me and
> ShabbyX, but you're too arrogant to give anyone else credit. Everything
> that hasn't been done by myself or Shahbaz doesn't work. He left the
> project and moved on to other things but I remember the countless hours we
> spent into revamping the entire tree. You tell me who the troll is, or just
> go hide off in your corner again like you always do.
>
>
> Alec Ari
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Subject: Digest Footer
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rtai mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.rtai.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rtai
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of Rtai Digest, Vol 117, Issue 8
> ************************************
>



-- 
Vivian McPhail
PhD Candidate
Department of Physics
University of Auckland

_______________________________________________
Rtai mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.rtai.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rtai