Stuart Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Michael Barabanov wrote:
> >
> > Stuart Hughes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > IMHO, it would be better to stick with standard POSIX and use POSIX
> > > clocks for timing. If this is too painful to users or people do not
> > > want to use POSIX, the original NMT/RTAI API provides a simple
> > > alternative.
> >
> > I really don't see any difference between rt_task_suspend and pthread_suspend_np.
> > You can
> > #define rtl_suspend_np pthread_suspend_np
> > if it seems better
> >
> > clock_gettime is supported in rtlinux2.0.
> >
> > Michael.
>
> Hi Michael
>
> Yes, that's what I do, and the point I was trying to make is that given
> that pthread_suspend_np takes no arguments, I can't see any reason to
> rename the original rtl_task_suspend function. I guess from the point
> of view of making the naming look consistent it is fair enough, so as
> long as people understant the _np issue.
>
I see your point. FYI, rt_task_suspend is present in the RTL v2.
RTL v2 API is a superset of the original API.
So I still fail to see why "the original NMT/RTAI API" is any simpler
than RTL v2 API.
--- [rtl] ---
To unsubscribe:
echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR
echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
For more information on Real-Time Linux see:
http://www.rtlinux.org/~rtlinux/
