Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-20 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 20/12/16 23:37, Chris Johns wrote: On 21/12/2016 08:20, Gedare Bloom wrote: I haven't fully understood the distinction. I get that C11 are individually (and collectively) smaller. I don't entirely get what is their time-space tradeoff or when they are less desirable. There are a few

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-20 Thread Chris Johns
On 21/12/2016 08:20, Gedare Bloom wrote: I haven't fully understood the distinction. I get that C11 are individually (and collectively) smaller. I don't entirely get what is their time-space tradeoff or when they are less desirable. There are a few advantages to self-contained resources like

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-20 Thread Gedare Bloom
On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > > On 15/12/16 23:34, Chris Johns wrote: >> >> On 15/12/2016 18:02, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> >>> On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > [...]

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-19 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 19/12/16 22:31, Chris Johns wrote: On 19/12/2016 17:32, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 16/12/16 21:50, Chris Johns wrote: If the same storage model and performance can be gained with POSIX why not look at moving in this direction. We should change the POSIX synchronization objects *

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-19 Thread Chris Johns
On 19/12/2016 17:32, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 16/12/16 21:50, Chris Johns wrote: If the same storage model and performance can be gained with POSIX why not look at moving in this direction. We should change the POSIX synchronization objects * mutexes, * rwlocks, * barriers, * condition

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-18 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 16/12/16 21:50, Chris Johns wrote: On 17/12/16 3:26 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 15/12/16 23:34, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 18:02, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: [...] Would the "tiny" footprint be

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-16 Thread Chris Johns
On 17/12/16 3:26 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > > On 15/12/16 23:34, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 15/12/2016 18:02, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: > [...] Would the "tiny" footprint be smaller if all internal

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-16 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 15/12/16 23:34, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 18:02, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: [...] Would the "tiny" footprint be smaller if all internal services including compiler thread support are made C11? Could

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-15 Thread Chris Johns
On 15/12/2016 18:02, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: Use C11 mutexes instead of Classic semaphores as a performance optimization and to simplify the application configuration. The use of C11 mutexes has not been agreed

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-14 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: Use C11 mutexes instead of Classic semaphores as a performance optimization and to simplify the application configuration. The use of C11 mutexes has not been agreed too and we need to discuss this in more

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-14 Thread Sebastian Huber
On 14/12/16 22:43, Peter Dufault wrote: Can someone help clarify the issue? Is this a “required compiler to build RTEMS” question? That is, are the compilers currently required to build the RTEMS Sebastian modified guaranteed to support C11 mutexes, and is it desirable to be more

Re: C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-14 Thread Peter Dufault
Can someone help clarify the issue? Is this a “required compiler to build RTEMS” question? That is, are the compilers currently required to build the RTEMS Sebastian modified guaranteed to support C11 mutexes, and is it desirable to be more conservative about what compiler is needed? If C11

C11 Re: [PATCH 3/6] termios: Use C11 mutex for input/output

2016-12-14 Thread Chris Johns
On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: Use C11 mutexes instead of Classic semaphores as a performance optimization and to simplify the application configuration. The use of C11 mutexes has not been agreed too and we need to discuss this in more detail before we allow use within RTEMS. I