[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I think there is a miscommunication here. If you mean the 'current' as
> > in Linux terms (e.g current->pid) then yes of course that may refer to a
> > low priory (Linux) task/process.
>
> No. 'current' means the actual version of RT-Linux (2.x).
Ok, got it now :-)
> >
> > I think I understand ? What was being said is that if you are in an
> > hard interrupt handler, and you use pthread_wakeup_np (or similar in
> > RTAI) to call the scheduler, the new RT thread runs before you exit the
> > ISR.
>
> Yes, this is the situation.
>
> > Victor was saying that depending an what you call, you can change the
> > behavior to let the ISR finish and then have the RT task/thread run
> > (pthread_mutex_unlock), this may be what you need.
>
> I use a "library function" that calls pthread_wakeup_np().
> I do not want to rewrite everything.
Tricky, I'm not sure what your options are.
>
>
> Sorry if I was confusing.
It's all clear now.
> I wrote my mail not for asking help to solve a given problem
> but I suggested a possible improvement of RTLinux IRQ handling scheme.
> Is this forum is not adequate for discussing principal issues? ;-)
I think its a good forum for this.
>
> (My program works well since I realized what happens.)
>
Well I think by now most people will know what to expect after all these
mails :-)
Regards, Stuart
-- [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/
