Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> No need for hard nklock protection of kheapq and the map counter, a >> normal spin lock suffices as all users must run over the root thread >> anyway. > > At the very least, this should use rthal_spin_lock, in order to seem to > respect the layering.
Then the conversion would make no sense (hard interrupt lock again). Given that we are fiddling with Linux mm directly here, there is no hal involved. > > Anyway, do we really want to change this now? > That's a different question. The patch alone does not buy us that much when we cannot reuse the lock for the heapq. Jan PS: More invasive changes will come anyway to plug cleanup races in the heap code.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomai-core@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
