On Mon, 2009-10-19 at 21:09 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > > Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> @@ -234,12 +239,65 @@ int xnheap_init(xnheap_t *heap, > >> > >> appendq(&heap->extents, &extent->link); > >> > >> + vsnprintf(heap->name, sizeof(heap->name), name, args); > >> + > >> + spin_lock(&heapq_lock); > >> + appendq(&heapq, &heap->stat_link); > >> + spin_unlock(&heapq_lock); > > > > You can not use a Linux spinlock in xnheap_init and xnheap_destroy: > > - this breaks the build for the simulator; > > - callers of xnheap_init and xnheap_destroy are not guaranteed to run on > > the root domain. > > Oh, yes, unfortunately. That callers appear to be fixable, but that's > probably not worth it at this point.
There is nothing to fix here. It's part of the service definition to be able to call it from primary mode. > I will have to rewrite > heap_read_proc to break out of nklock frequently. Also not nice, but > less invasive. > > Jan > > _______________________________________________ > Xenomai-core mailing list > Xenomai-core@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomai-core@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
