On 2013-08-07 08:18, Chris Johns wrote:
Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 2013-08-07 07:55, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 2013-08-06 23:48, Chris Johns wrote:
Sebastian Huber wrote:

- (void) rtems_task_delete( RTEMS_SELF );
+ /* FIXME: Task deletion currently not supported */
+ (void) rtems_task_suspend( RTEMS_SELF );


In my view this is a blocker for 4.11. With such a bug we cannot say
SMP is
available and it was planned to be in 4.11.

Is there a "hold giant lock" level solution ? That is something, even if
performance is poor, that is stable.

I don't know an easy solution for the thread deletion problem, see also

http://www.rtems.org/pipermail/rtems-devel/2013-July/003509.html


A list of other unsupported features can be found here:

http://git.rtems.org/rtems/tree/testsuites/smptests/smpunsupported01/init.c

The task variable API will never work on SMP

I consider this a feature. I never liked that API. This might break the
environment stuff related to the shell which I think uses it. I need to check.

(the Ada self rtems_ada_self has the same problem).

I will leave that for Joel.

For Newlib a similar fixed with the usage of __getreent().

Do you mean newlib has this fixed with __getreent()

Sorry, I meant for Newlib a similar problem was fixed with the usage of __getreent().



As a result the C++ support is currently broken on SMP.


Which specific bits ?

rtems_gxx_once() and the rtems_gxx_key*() stuff. This is used for global and static C++ objects.


The non-preempt mode can work on SMP, but I think this would lead to a
broken design.

On SMP the Classic API should return an error.


The bdbuf and the once functions will not work due to that (mutual
exclusion via non-preempt doesn't work on SMP).


Yes, we need condition variables in the Classic API.

Yes.

--
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : [email protected]
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.
_______________________________________________
rtems-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel

Reply via email to