As Chris said you may want to check how much free wkspace remains. Maybe you can copy the object handler approach. Maybe later they can even share code.. On Jul 29, 2013 9:38 PM, "Ashi" <ashi08...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote: > >> I would put it back to the freechain unless there is a good way to check >> if the wkspace is almost all gone, which only is an issue for unlimited >> mode of some object. >> > I see. > >> I do not have RTEMS in front of me to look at the code, but going from 4 >> to 5 would change when the thread allocation occurs. How many pthreads in >> the test? >> > In the 4 case, there will be 363+1 threads, here "1" refers the POSIX_Init > thread. And in the 5 case, there will be 365+1 threads. > >> -Gedare >> On Jul 28, 2013 11:55 AM, "Ashi" <ashi08...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I'm updating this patch this days, but get stuck with several problems: >>> >>> - when key deleting, should we just put the deleted node back to >>> freechain or run workspace_free on these deleted nodes? >>> >>> - my current code (at: >>> https://github.com/ashi08104/rtems/tree/one_rbtree_add_fl) can't pass >>> the unlimited test cases (psxkey07 and psxkey08). I tried to debug it, but >>> still with no success until now. one interesting thing is when I change >>> following line in psxkey07/init.c: >>> >>> #define CONFIGURE_MAXIMUM_POSIX_THREADS rtems_resource_unlimited(5) >>> >>> to: >>> >>> #define CONFIGURE_MAXIMUM_POSIX_THREADS rtems_resource_unlimited(4) >>> >>> then, this test case will be OK. And change to different number of >>> rtems_resource_unlimited() would lead to different errors. >>> Could anyone give me some hints about this? If necessary, I can provide >>> more details. Thanks! >>> >>> --Zhongwei >>> >>> >
_______________________________________________ rtems-devel mailing list rtems-devel@rtems.org http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
