Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
>>>> [...]
> 
>>>> e.g.
>>>>
>>>> the "cookie" remains opaque for the ipipe but when requested by
>>>> HAL::rthal_irq_request() or NUCLEUS::xnintr_irq_handler() it's treated
> as a
>>>> chain of ISR handlers.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yep, that's also what I had in mind about potential ipipe changes and
>>> their use in the nucleus.
>>>
>> Ok, let's go for those changes this way:
>>
>> 1. The I-pipe series needs to be updated so that an opaque cookie
> ispassed to
>> the handler; since we have a change in the interface, the 1.1 serieshas
> to be
>> started for this purpose.
>>
>> 2. In order to let the people running the legacy RTAI/fusion and
>> Xenomai 2.0.x
>> series a reasonable amount of time to upgrade their patchset, the IRQ
> layer
>> updates (sharing and trampoline suppression) will go to the Xenomai 2.1
> dev
>> branch. IOW, Xenomai 2.1 will be exclusively based on the I-pipe 1.1
> series,
>> which also means that Xenomai support for the oldgen Adeos and I-pipe 1.0
> 
>> patches will be discontinued after the Xenomai 2.0.x series is closed.
>>
>> 3. Changes in the IRQ layer will be made at nucleus level, which is the
> most
>> efficient way to provide them.
>>
> 
> Ok, I'd take this task (err.. since I'm not doing anything useful for
> Xenomai at the moment). Although, I may start not earlier than next week.
> Jan, since you have come up with the initial proposol and maybe you need
> get that new code working asap, it's up to you to handle it on your own :o)
> Just let me know in that case.
> 

Thanks for the helping hand. I will be really happy if you could realise
this.

It's also not yet burning on our side. I guess we will be busy enough to
get a few devices running, to have ALL running with potentially shared
IRQs can be scheduled later.

Hope we will be able to continue with more detailed discussions tomorrow
evening!

Jan

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to