Jan Kiszka wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> Slowly moving on toward generic fast mutex support for Xenomai, this >> patch is a proposal to address the increasing divergence of >> owner-tracking vs. owner-less xnsynch objects. >> >> The services dealing with the former will likely include a new, lockless >> prologues for the mutex fastpath. At the the same time, this additional >> code should not disturb too much in those cases where we do not track >> ownership (condition variables, events, semaphores etc.). Moreover, I >> noticed that some of the existing code assumes XNSYNCH_NOPIP means no >> ownership, which is surely not true. The already visible effect is that >> lock stealing is needlessly restricted to XNSYNCH_PIP. >> >> Going through the API, I dug out three diverging services and replaced >> them with two new ones: >> >> Owner-less xnsynch objects: >> - xnsynch_sleep_on >> - xnsynch_wakeup_one_sleeper >> - xnsynch_wakeup_this_sleeper >> >> Owner-tracking xnsynch objects: >> - xnsynch_acquire >> - xnsynch_release >> >> The latter type of objects are marked with the new flag XNSYNCH_OWNER, >> used only for debugging and code documentation purposes in the current >> implementation. >> >> Find a first draft of this approach attached (compile-tested). Before >> going down this round, I would like to collect opinions and finally an >> Ack on this (or and alternative approach). I also briefly thought about >> branching two xnsynch sub-objects for owner/no-owner. But that would >> likely make the changes far more complicated and invasive. > > Forgot to mention that the patch applies on top of the first 4 patches > of my "fast mutex rework" series (conflicts in posix only). > > Jan > > PS: gna.org is dead. Hope it will recover soon... >
Server has moved. DNS are slowly catching up. -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
