On Thu, August 9, 2007 17:23, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>> But my negative error code does not help me in any way now. >>>>> rt_dev_close() fails and therefore I'm having trouble using the same >>>>> program more than once ;) >>>> Oops, sorry (RTFM - read the fine mail...). Indeed, -524 means >>>> -ENOTSUPP, and this error code is only returned in the asymmetric >>>> closure case. >>>> But that is actually broken in itself. Such a high error code should >>>> not >>>> leak into userland, and we would run better with returning -ENOSYS. >>>> That >>>> would trigger an automatic context switch internally. I think I'll >>>> kill >>>> that confusing warning in RTDM rev.6 already now. >>> Done (for the 2.4 series): >>> http://svn.gna.org/viewcvs/xenomai?rev=2901&view=rev >> >> Thanks...but since we don't get 2.4 running at the moment and are >> running >> out of time, is there an easy workaround ? To my understanding should it >> work, if I do a printf before rt_dev_close to switch to secondary mode. > Yes, it should. The patch just removes the need for this printf (or > rt_task_set_mode).
Ok, understood everything right then. >> Well....but it doesn't. > Means you still get the same warning on the kernel console? I didn't get any warnings befor but the returnvalue of -524. Just tested it again, my fault. A printf does its job, I will use the set_mode then and it will do for me :) Greets, Nadym ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ RTnet-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rtnet-users
