Jan Kiszka wrote: > Don't raise SIGXCPU while the process is being debugged. These mode > changes are expected, and reporting them doesn't provide any helpful > information to the application. Rather, it may raise error storms on the > application side. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> > --- > > ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c | 3 ++- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c b/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c > index bcf3b8b..91cf499 100644 > --- a/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c > +++ b/ksrc/nucleus/shadow.c > @@ -1082,7 +1082,8 @@ void xnshadow_relax(int notify) > > xnstat_counter_inc(&thread->stat.ssw); /* Account for secondary mode > switch. */ > > - if (notify && xnthread_test_state(thread, XNTRAPSW)) > + if (notify && xnthread_test_state(thread, XNTRAPSW) && > + !xnthread_test_state(thread, XNDEBUG)) > /* Help debugging spurious relaxes. */ > send_sig(SIGXCPU, current, 1); >
I would rather identify the source of the switch and clear the notify flag appropriately from the relax call site. > > _______________________________________________ > Xenomai-core mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core > -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
