Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> The following changes since commit 
>>>> af93ec87f975b387243127090b578d57922b38dc:
>>>>   Gilles Chanteperdrix (1):
>>>>         posix: fix recursive condvar implementation
>>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>>   git:// for-upstream
>>>> These patches pass basic testings, specifically our extended testsuite,
>>>> but I'm still unhappy with the workaround. Specifically the fact that we
>>>> lose -EINTR as valid return code for the Native side is fairly annoying.
>>>> For that reason, I will continue to work out fixed prologue/epilogue
>>>> syscalls for both skins that up-to-date user space will be able to
>>>> benefit from (native kernel space part is already done). The majority of
>>>> users will continue to update kernel and user space synchronously
>>>> anyway, for the rest we will provide these workarounds here.
>>> Let us calm down, and avoid pushing changes which are worse than the
>>> issue they try and correct. I will not publish anything on these issues
>>> before this week-end. Instead of modifying the mutex-torture unt test, I
>>> will try and write a condvar-torture unit test, which exhaustively test
>>> all the return values of pthread_cond_wait/rt_cond_wait, including
>>> interruption by signals during the cond_wait, and the epilogue.
>> Fine with me. By then, we may also have feedback from our field tests.
>> And should have finished writing the new syscall sets.
> Do not bother, I intend to handle all this.

That would be wasted effort as I'm half through (POSIX is missing). Will
post my suggestion so that you have at least a chance to pick what you like.

>> Will you also split up the torture test to leave the timed mutex test
>> case in or should I do this?
> Ok. Will add the timeout tests to the mutex torture test.


Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux

Xenomai-core mailing list

Reply via email to