Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>>> @@ -192,6 +192,9 @@ static void *__pthread_trampoline(void *arg)
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>         param.sched_priority = iargs->prio;
>>>>>>>         policy = iargs->policy;
>>>>>>> +       if (policy == SCHED_RR)
>>>>>>> +               /* Restrict round-robin scheduling to the Xenomai 
>>>>>>> domain. */
>>>>>>> +               policy = SCHED_FIFO;
>>>>>> Should not there be the same thing in __wrap_pthread_setschedparam ?
>>>>> Yes, and setschedparam_ex, here we go:
>>>> Actually, I am wondering if we can not get rid of these calls to
>>>> __real_pthread_setschedparam, now that propagating kernel-space priority
>>>> to user-space is done by a signal ?
>>> Not with the existing code, as that only forwards prio changes, but no
>>> policy changes.
>> If we map SCHED_RR to SCHED_FIFO, are there any policy changes?
> 
> Yes, the initial one. Keep in mind that not all pthread implementations
> may respect the pthread_attr or have problems assigning SCHED_FIFO to
> threads of non-root users.

Ok. What about calling xnshadow_renice in xnshadow_map ?

-- 
                                                 Gilles.

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to