Jan Kiszka wrote:
I understand the need, but I will cowardly let Philippe decide whether
he likes the implementation details.
In some places (pse51_mutex_timedlock_inner for instances) you use
XN_NO_HANDLE, in others (pse51_mutex_timedlock for instances) you use
NULL, are the two equivalents ? If yes, should not we always use the
same consistently ? Otherwise looks ok.
Ok. This is even a bug fix.
things have moved too much to see what has really changed in
xnsynch_wakeup_one_sleeper and xnsynch_sleep_on. But is not there a
common behaviour between the old and new services that could be factored
? But otherwise I agree with the general idea of the patch, this is what
we had discussed with Philippe.
Xenomai-core mailing list