Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
Jan Kiszka wrote:
 > As a first step, I would vote for establishing that generic service to
 > redirect the userspace return path to some arbitrary handler in hard-RT
 > context. Then we can think about how to handle signal injection from
 > Linux vs. injection from Xenomai gracefully.

Ok, the first idea was a bad idea. Will try the second, or the
alternative proposed by Philippe.

> > > > > > > > > What do you think, is it worth including as a POSIX counterpart for
 > >  > testsuite/latency?
> > > > There are a few details that I do not like about this tool, but we may
 > > take it, and fix the details later.
> > It's a real hack, isn't it ;)? But what precisely do you mean?

What I dislike most, is the lack of return values check. This may work
well with Linux, but not with Xenomai. I would also prefer a clean
shutdown using pthread_cancel, after all sigwait and *nanosleep are
cancellation points, so it should work even without resorting to cleanup
handlers.


The current implementation is one thing (we could fix it), the purpose of the tool is another, and actually, this is the latter which seems useful to me. By sharing some common tests between native preemption and real-time sub-systems like Xeno, we would make performance comparisons more relevant. Additionally, I'm convinced that the POSIX skin is an underutilized goodie albeit it works damn well and obviously favours a close integration within the Linux environment, simply because there is a lack of explanation about it. Illustrating how one could leverage it is always a good thing.

--

Philippe.

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to