On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Fabien MAHOT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Gilles Chanteperdrix >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Fabien MAHOT >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I tried your new patch and, now there is no longer issue of priority >>>> inheritance with a mutex. Thanks a lot for that. >>>> >>>> However, there are still problems with my big application. It still >>>> crashes. >>>> >>>> From the test program that you corrected (with check functions), I >>>> succeeded to reproduce them. >>>> >>>> Write function returns "Interrrupt system call" error (EINTR). this is >>>> normal. >>>> >>>> but I ve got the same error message with pthread_mutex_unlock. In the >>>> specification of this function, there is a note about that : "These >>>> functions shall not return an error code of [EINTR]." (these functions >>>> are >>>> pthread_mutex_lock, pthread_mutex_unlock, pthread_mutex_trylock) >>> >>> Actually I do not know how this can happen, since the EINTR error is >>> trapped inside pthread_mutex_lock. Will try your example. >> >> Ah, I see, it is pthread_mutex_unlock which returns EINTR, not >> pthread_mutex_lock. I will change this. In the meantime, you can >> simply ignore the EINTR error: the mutex unlock succeeeded even if it >> returns EINTR. >> >> -- >> Gilles >> > > OK, thank you. > > And do you have an idea about the bug traces ?
No, I have no idea where this 512 come from. Do you still get it if you do not call timer_delete in the signal handler ? -- Gilles _______________________________________________ Xenomai-help mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
