Jan Kiszka wrote:
> @@ -329,6 +326,13 @@ int pse51_mutex_timedlock_break(struct _
> break;
> }
> }
> + if (!xnsynch_nsleepers(&mutex->synchbase)) {
> + xnarch_atomic_set
> + (mutex->owner,
> + clear_claimed
> + (xnarch_atomic_get(mutex->owner)));
> + xnsynch_set_owner(&mutex->synchbase, NULL);
> + }
> xnlock_put_irqrestore(&nklock, s);
I do not like this at all. I mean, unless I am mistaken, we loose more
than we gain, we are adding a couple of atomic, hence heavy, operations
in a common case for handling a corner case. I still prefer emitting a
system call in the corner case.
--
Gilles.
_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
