Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> 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 ?

Sorry, I can't follow. xnshadow_renice does not help user space to find
the right policy, or what do you mean?

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux

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

Reply via email to