On 25.05.21 10:46, Philippe Gerum wrote: > > Jan Kiszka <[email protected]> writes: > >> Hi Philippe, >> >> [1] makes rtdm_schedule_nrt_work a rather heavyweight service, compared >> to what it was (and even over I-pipe). xnmalloc is nothing you would >> expect from a "send a signal" service, specifically from >> rtdm_nrtsig_pend which does not even make use of the sending extra payload. >> >> Can we do better? Also for xnthread_signal (fd and udd usecases are not >> time-sensitive anyway). >> > > Nope, I cannot see any significantly better option which would still > allow a common implementation we can map on top of Dovetail / I-pipe. >
E.g. pre-allocate the work object for data-free signals and use that - or not send it when it is in use, thus pending. Jan -- Siemens AG, T RDA IOT Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
