On 11/07/2009 12:01 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
One thing I do not understand: if yield() is a bug to RT kernels, then we would have to remove them all? But so far, yield() still exists in the kernel tree, and it serves a purpose. Are you going to ask all developers to remove all occurrences of yield() in their code? Doesn't sound terribly realistic.
The flaw in using yield() with RT priorities, is that it doesn't do what you expect.
The scheduler will run, and pick the highest-priority thread, which is the one yield()-ing.
So the risk is, that whatever the yield() intended to do, it won't do, and worse, that you will end up endlessly yielding to yourself, locking the machine.
So the call is for something more explicit of an implementation. Sven -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
