Jan Kiszka wrote: > Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>>> 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 >>>>> xnthread_handle(current_thread). It furthermore converts the POSIX mutex >>>>> implementation to pick up and store the lock owner as handle in the >>>>> kernel/user-shared mutex. Finally it ensures that at least POSIX threads >>>>> always have an (anonymous) handle assigned. >>>>> >>>>> As the value stored in the mutex variable is now an integer, we can >>>>> switch over to xnarch_atomic_t, removing all atomic_intptr users. >>>> Ok. I do not know if this should be part of this patch, or in another >>>> one, but we should call xeno_set_current in the trampolines of all >>>> skins, so that they can use the native and posix mutexes. >>>> >>>> This is another thing that I have left in a state of flux... >>> Find it below (PATCH 4/3). >>> >>> BTW, should we better invoke pthread_exit in xeno_set_current in case of >>> a failure? >> I prefer my application to die. This way I would know that something >> went wrong. And by the way, how could this syscall fail ? I mean if >> xenomai or the posix skin are not loaded, we would have known it earlier. > > So far this syscall can trigger a thread handle registration if the > current thread has no handle yet. But that could go away if all skins > ensure that there is at least an anonymous handle for their threads > after creation.
Then it looks redundant with the code that does associate a handle with a new thread in the posix skin. -- Gilles. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomaiemail@example.com https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core