Re: KITLinterruptthread
- From: "Bruce Eitman [eMVP]" <bruce.eitman.nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:20:53 -0400
Huh?
The way to achive that would be to kill all of the threads in your system,
or at least cause all of them to block and disable all interrupts to insure
that other threads don't become unblocked. Of course then you won't able to
resume your thread becuase Sleep will not return.
Why would you expect idle time to be so close to the amount of time that a
single thread is blocked?
--
Bruce Eitman (eMVP)
Senior Engineer
Bruce.Eitman AT EuroTech DOT com
My BLOG http://geekswithblogs.net/bruceeitman
EuroTech Inc.
www.EuroTech.com
"ramki_katta" <u45996@uwe> wrote in message news:89be3e07f1ab9@xxxxxx
Hi all,
Iam testing GetIdletime functionality with following code
DWORD dwSleepStartMS = GetTickCount();
DWORD dwIdleStartMS = GetIdleTime();
Sleep (dwSleepTime);
DWORD dwIdleEndMS = GetIdleTime();
DWORD dwSleepEndMS = GetTickCount();
I executed this test case on tinykernel, but difference of GetIdletime
(dwIdleEndMS-dwIdleStartMS)
very less than dwsleepTime,
(if sleep time is 30000 milli sec then GetIdletime diff producing 25698)
I have checked in thread window status, there KITLInterruptthread
consuming
more time,
I want Idletime at least near to sleeptime, how can achive this
please suggest solution
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: KITLinterruptthread
- From: ramki_katta via PocketPCJunkies.com
- Re: KITLinterruptthread
- References:
- KITLinterruptthread
- From: ramki_katta
- KITLinterruptthread
- Prev by Date: KITLinterruptthread
- Next by Date: Disable debug messages on serial port.
- Previous by thread: KITLinterruptthread
- Next by thread: Re: KITLinterruptthread
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
