On 2014-06-02 15:32, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Jun 2, 2014 9:28 AM, Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > On 2014-06-02 15:24, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > Does this resource tracking replace the code for strict order mutex? > > No, the MrsP (and maybe later the Migratory Priority Inheritance) semaphores > are completely separate. > > In theory it is possible to use it also for the uni-processor semaphores, but I > am not sure if its worth to add this overhead. The implementation with the > resource count is analytically not correct, but very efficient. Was this > really a source for trouble in the last 20 years or so? Not from a performance viewpoint but from a system end to end priority analysis, it is less than ideal.
I think the bigger problem is that the priority inheritance affects only one level, see new test sptests/spsem03.
-- 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
