On 25/03/2014 4:41 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
On 3/24/2014 12:36 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
On 03/24/2014 06:14 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Hi
My most recently built toolset seems to be using pthreads instead
of the RTEMS thread code. Any ideas?
Its due to this patch:
http://git.rtems.org/rtems-tools/tree/tools/4.11/gcc/gcc-rtems-thread-model-posix-1.diff
We should really avoid using the POSIX GCC thread model. Its too
dangerous due to the silent errors.
Yes this is true but it did not fail in the way the RTEMS wrapper did
with SMP. I felt it was the lesser of 2 bad situations.
I also suspect the issue with gcc and the POSIX thread support is still
open and will need to be addressed. As far as I understand the mingw64
tools uses POSIX rather than the win32 thread model with an add on
pthread library.
I knew the patch and the problem. I was surprised it was included and
wanted to confirm that we agreed it shouldn't be.
Should I put together a patch for the RSB?
If we keep using the wrapper that is fine and I will review a patch once
the gxx wrapper changes to fix it have been completed and merged into
master. Sebastian, how is the gxx_wrapper code tested ?
Long term I feel the posix thread model maybe a better path because it
means we need just one supported interface with gcc. The c++11 threading
support will also require pthreads.
Chris
_______________________________________________
rtems-devel mailing list
rtems-devel@rtems.org
http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
