[Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/9] Switch to handle-based fast mutex owners - v2

Jan Kiszka wrote: To improve robustness of the fast mutex implementation in POSIX (and later on in native), it is better to track the mutex owner by handle instead of kernel object pointer. Therefore, this patch changes __xn_sys_current (xeno_set_current) so that it returns

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/9] Switch to handle-based fast mutex owners - v2

Jan Kiszka wrote: @@ -230,18 +230,20 @@ static inline int mutex_save_count(xnthr mutex = shadow-mutex; - if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_intptr_get(mutex-owner)) != cur) + if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_get(mutex-owner)) != + xnthread_handle(cur))

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/9] Switch to handle-based fast mutex owners - v2

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: @@ -230,18 +230,20 @@ static inline int mutex_save_count(xnthr mutex = shadow-mutex; -if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_intptr_get(mutex-owner)) != cur) +if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_get(mutex-owner)) != +

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/9] Switch to handle-based fast mutex owners - v2

Jan Kiszka wrote: Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: @@ -230,18 +230,20 @@ static inline int mutex_save_count(xnthr mutex = shadow-mutex; - if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_intptr_get(mutex-owner)) != cur) + if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_get(mutex-owner)) != +

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/9] Switch to handle-based fast mutex owners - v2

Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: @@ -230,18 +230,20 @@ static inline int mutex_save_count(xnthr mutex = shadow-mutex; - if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_intptr_get(mutex-owner)) != cur) + if

Re: [Xenomai-core] [PATCH 2/9] Switch to handle-based fast mutex owners - v2

Jan Kiszka wrote: Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: Jan Kiszka wrote: @@ -230,18 +230,20 @@ static inline int mutex_save_count(xnthr mutex = shadow-mutex; - if (clear_claimed(xnarch_atomic_intptr_get(mutex-owner)) != cur) + if

[Xenomai-core] [RFC][PATCH 8/9] Native support for fast mutexes - v2

Jan Kiszka wrote: Analogously to POSIX, this patch adds fast mutex support to the native skin. For reference only: Updated to include the claimed-bit-race fix. --- include/native/mutex.h | 31 +++- ksrc/skins/native/cond.c| 17 +- ksrc/skins/native/mutex.c | 339

[Xenomai-core] [PATCH] POSIX: Fix race when setting claimed bit - v2

[ The refactored version according to our discussion. ] This patch fixes the race when the claimed bit changes between the lock less check an the entry of the nklock-protected section. --- ksrc/skins/posix/mutex.h |9 +++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Index:

[Xenomai-core] mailinglist problem

Hi This message realy does not belong here I know, but i am not getting any response from the manager of this list!! I am getting an E-mail from the list that mails are being bounced and therfore i am suspended from the list. I have looked in to our mail server, it does not even get there

Re: [Xenomai-core] mailinglist problem

Johan Visser wrote: Hi This message realy does not belong here I know, but i am not getting any response from the manager of this list!! I am getting an E-mail from the list that mails are being bounced and therfore i am suspended from the list. I have looked in to our mail server, it does