On 15-11-09 03:45 AM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
On Sun, Nov 08, 2015 at 04:54:39PM -0800, Mathieu Rondonneau wrote:
Well, I am sorry, I am unable to communicate in a language where the
(universal) rules of logic do not apply. I suspect very few people
can.
I don't think it is about that.
It is exactly about that. The doc says "if the handler is
handle_fasteoi_irq, then add irq_hold and put an ipipe_lock in the
mask/unmask callbacks". Applying partially the "then" clause, when
the condition is false (when the handler is not handle_fasteoi_irq)
is an error of logic.
ok I give up, I won't mention the doc again.
What i am saying is the doc does not need to follow the coding structure.
I think what I take from it (and I tend to forget) is that the doc is
for specific port and does not mean to be generic.
I have tried to make everything for the ARM architecture so that the
work of porting the I-pipe can be generic. So, having a
documentation that is not generic would be a failure.
Fine, it is your doc. I will stop suggesting changes. :)
Anyway, I am interested by your contribution, but as it is, I am
afraid you still misunderstood.
Please explain one more time, I really would like to understand :)
I like what you guys are doing.
the RPI2 uses handle_percpu_devid_irq for the local
timers/counters/IPI/videocore.
Once I get something working, I definitely will send you a patch for you
guys to review.
I was talking about your contribution to the documentation. But of
course, the contribution of the port would be welcome, but this goes
without saying, since the documentations says it:
http://xenomai.org/2014/09/porting-xenomai-dual-kernel-to-a-new-arm-soc/#Publishing_your_modifications
the section does not talk about how to contribute to the doc.
that's ok, I will now stop suggesting doc update/changes. :)
Side note: with two irqchip (one for handle_level_irq that does not
lock_irq in mask and the one for handle_percpu_devid_irq that does the
lock_irq in mask()) it does work.
You can probably have only one irqchip and not bother to insert the
calls to ipipe_lock/unlock_irq.
Ok, this is new peace of information, that would work too. But then,
when one needs a lock_irq in mask and one does not?
(it is the same question as 2 comments above.
As the doc says, when the handler is handle_fasteoi_irq.
sure.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai mailing list
[email protected]
http://xenomai.org/mailman/listinfo/xenomai
