Hi! > >> I just now noticed the PTHREAD_PRIO_PROTECT portion of the patch. > >> The testcase passes now (I can vouch for it passing on FreeBSD), but > >> none of the POSIX specs I read mention anything about this being a > >> hard requirement. So something needs to be figured out as far as > >> whether or not the specs are broken, or this an issue with the > >> pthreads implementation on both FreeBSD and Linux. > > > > Yes, I was unable to find this in the posix too. I consulted our glibc > > maintainer and all I've got was "it doesn't work without > > PTHREAD_PRIO_PROTECT". And even free pages from O'Reilly "A POSIX > > Standart for Better Mutiprocessing" seems to suggest that. I'll try to > > get that book as it seems to be only source of documentation for > > realtime threads I know about. Anyway it does make sense to return > > priority only for mutexes that can be prioritized. > > I just committed a slightly modified version of your III patch. > I'll have to chase down the POSIX people about this discrepancy...
Okay ;). Still there are other pthread tests to fix. May be we sould make the function print_pthread_error() library call so that it could be used from other openposix pthread tests. -- Cyril Hrubis [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Palm PDK Hot Apps Program offers developers who use the Plug-In Development Kit to bring their C/C++ apps to Palm for a share of $1 Million in cash or HP Products. Visit us here for more details: http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;226879339;13503038;l? http://clk.atdmt.com/CRS/go/247765532/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
