On 07/23/2015 03:27 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2015-07-23 11:45, Philippe Gerum wrote: >> On 07/23/2015 11:37 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> On 2015-07-23 11:24, Philippe Gerum wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Jan, >>>> >>>> Do you still have a use case for calling rt_print_auto_init(false) or >>>> not calling rt_print_auto_init(true) from libcobalt's bootstrap code? >>>> >>> >>> Huh, that was a day-one feature, now 8 years old, barely remember the >>> details. I'm currently not aware of a concrete scenario. It definitely >>> makes sense to revisit this think. >>> >>> I guess one, if not the major problem back then was that the implicit >>> malloc of the initialization step was not consistently causing a >>> SIGDEBUG warning. That is now different. >>> >> >> Since the current thread won't be notified until XNWARN is armed in its >> TCB, any objection to move that call as a nop placeholder to the compat >> section in libtrank, leaving the implicit init to libcobalt as currently? > > Ack. >
Ok, let's see how deep you can dive into your context stack these days: what about rt_print_cleanup() now? I see no in-tree callers, and I wonder whether there is any use case for an application to stop the stdio support during runtime. -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai mailing list [email protected] http://xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai
