Here comes our current patch series to fix and enhance fast mutexes for both the POSIX as well as the native skin. After the long discussion on this list, it is clear that this is not the last word. However, we are currently not aware of regressions or still broken corner cases, so this series may at least serve as a reference for future versions.
Patches 1-4 should already be mergeable. They introduce handle-based owner tracking for the fast locks and clean up some code. Patch 5 adds lock stealing support to pthread_mutex_trylock (something that the glibc does not provide, BTW...). It "misuses" xnsynch_sleep_on(..., XN_NONBLOCK) for this, but reuses a lot of code this way. To compensate for the overhead if this path, patch 9 optimizes xnsynch_sleep_on for XN_NONBLOCK users. Take this as a reference for one of the three possible approaches. Another one, some dedicated xnsynch_try_acquire (or so), may later be examined as well so that we can compare pros and cons. But first the third one, lock stealing via fast locks, should be analyzed /wrt feasibility. Patch 6 is an intermediate helper to break out of the lock stealing loop in xnsynch_sleep_on (XNSYNCH_FWDROB). Patch 7 applies it on the POSIX skin, overcoming the duplicated sleeper tracking. XNSYNCH_FWROB will be obsolete once we merge fast lock support into xnsynch. Patch 8 introduces fast mutexes to the native skin. This approach is built upon the same mechanisms as the POSIX skin (XNSYNCH_FWROB, trylock via xnsynch_sleep_on) to compare both implementations. The reason for differences is mostly the simpler native API. It passes an analogous test case like Gilles wrote for POSIX (augmented with lock stealing tests). The testsuite will be posted later after some refactoring work. Feedback welcome. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomaiemail@example.com https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core