On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >> And when looking at the holders of rpilock, I think one issue could be
> >> that we hold that lock while calling into xnpod_renice_root [1], ie.
> >> doing a potential context switch. Was this checked to be save?
> >
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >> And when looking at the holders of rpilock, I think one issue could be
> >> that we hold that lock while calling into xnpod_renice_root [1], ie.
> >> doing a potential context switch. Was this checked to be save?
> >
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
And when looking at the holders of rpilock, I think one issue could be
that we hold that lock while calling into xnpod_renice_root [1], ie.
doing a potential context switch. Was this
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 17:35 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> And when looking at the holders of rpilock, I think one issue could be
> that we hold that lock while calling into xnpod_renic
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 17:35 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe Gerum wrote:
>> And when looking at the holders of rpilock, I think one issue could be
>> that we hold that lock while
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> Ok, the rpilock is local, the nesting level is bearable, let's focus on
> putting this thingy straight.
Well, redesigning things may not necessarily improve the situation, but
reducing the amount of special RPI code might be worth a thought:
What is so special about RPI co
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:18 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 17:35 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >> And when looking at the holders of rpiloc
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:18 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 17:35 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Philippe Gerum wrote:
And when looking
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 22:15 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:18 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >>> On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 17:35 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 14:40 +0200, Jan Kis
Philippe Gerum wrote:
...
> Read my mail, without listening to your own grumble at the same time,
> you should see that this is not a matter of being right or wrong, it is
> a matter of who needs what, and how one will use Xenomai. Your grumble
> does not prove anything unfortunately, otherwise eve
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 16:20 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> ...
> > Read my mail, without listening to your own grumble at the same time,
> > you should see that this is not a matter of being right or wrong, it is
> > a matter of who needs what, and how one will use Xenomai. Your
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 16:20 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> OK, let's go through this another time, this time under the motto "get
> the locking right". As a start (and a help for myself), here comes an
> overview of the scheme the final version may expose - as long as there
> are separate locks:
>
>
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 19:57 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > Ok, the rpilock is local, the nesting level is bearable, let's focus on
> > putting this thingy straight.
>
Sorry, I missed this one, which in fact explains that you were referring
to Xenomai PI and not PREEMPT_RT PI
Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 16:20 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>
>> OK, let's go through this another time, this time under the motto "get
>> the locking right". As a start (and a help for myself), here comes an
>> overview of the scheme the final version may expose - as long as ther
14 matches
Mail list logo
