> -----Original Message----- > From: ged...@gwmail.gwu.edu [mailto:ged...@gwmail.gwu.edu] On > Behalf Of Gedare Bloom > Sent: Monday, March 03, 2014 10:46 AM > To: Sebastian Huber > Cc: Jennifer Averett; rtems-devel@rtems.org > Subject: Re: Posix patchs to support affinity attribute in newlib > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Sebastian Huber > <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 2014-03-03 16:36, Jennifer Averett wrote: > >>> > >>> >Is the implementation correct for CPU sets which are not pre- > allocated? > >>> > > >> > >> Until we have a system that supports over 32 CPU's the implementation > >> can not be tested for this. I minimized the locations that will have > >> to be touched when we support this but I didn't think it was correct > >> to add code that can not be tested. > >> > > > > You can test the inline functions separately. You can add an > > _Assert() if someone hits a not implemented path. If you copy an > > attribute with somehow allocated CPU sets, then you need to allocate > somehow memory for the copy. > > This allocation may fail, so you cannot use a void function? > > > This is a good point. Most copy functions return the destination pointer. >
I'll change this inline to return an int and add Assert here and in the creation of a thread. It already Asserts in initialization if more than 32 processors are present in the system. > > > > -- > > 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 : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > > PGP : Public key available on request. > > > > Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. > > _______________________________________________ > > rtems-devel mailing list > > rtems-devel@rtems.org > > http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel _______________________________________________ rtems-devel mailing list rtems-devel@rtems.org http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel