Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>>>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>>>>> @@ -192,6 +192,9 @@ static void *__pthread_trampoline(void *arg) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> param.sched_priority = iargs->prio; >>>>>>>> policy = iargs->policy; >>>>>>>> + if (policy == SCHED_RR) >>>>>>>> + /* Restrict round-robin scheduling to the Xenomai >>>>>>>> domain. */ >>>>>>>> + policy = SCHED_FIFO; >>>>>>> Should not there be the same thing in __wrap_pthread_setschedparam ? >>>>>> Yes, and setschedparam_ex, here we go: >>>>> Actually, I am wondering if we can not get rid of these calls to >>>>> __real_pthread_setschedparam, now that propagating kernel-space priority >>>>> to user-space is done by a signal ? >>>> Not with the existing code, as that only forwards prio changes, but no >>>> policy changes. >>> If we map SCHED_RR to SCHED_FIFO, are there any policy changes? >> Yes, the initial one. Keep in mind that not all pthread implementations >> may respect the pthread_attr or have problems assigning SCHED_FIFO to >> threads of non-root users. > > Ok. What about calling xnshadow_renice in xnshadow_map ?
Sorry, I can't follow. xnshadow_renice does not help user space to find the right policy, or what do you mean? Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
