Jan Kiszka wrote:
> I just hope we finally converge over a solution. Looks like all
> possibilities have been explored now. A few more comments on this one:
> 
> It probably makes sense to group the status bits accordingly (both their
> values and definitions) and briefly document on which status field they
> are supposed to be applied.
> 
> I do not understand the split logic - or some bits are simply not yet
> migrated. XNHDEFER, XNSWLOCK, XNKCOUT are all local-only as well, no?
> Then better put them in the _local_ status field, that's more consistent
> (and would help if we once wanted to optimize their cache line usage).
> 
> The naming is unfortunate: status vs. lstatus. This is asking for
> confusion and typos. They must be better distinguishable, e.g.
> local_status. Or we need accessors that have debug checks built in,
> catching wrong bits for their target fields.
> 
> Good catch of the RPI breakage, Gilles!

Hi Jan,

I just pushed a modified version of this patch, including your remarks
as well as the ones of Philippe. I suspect some of the cleanup patches
you sent still make sense over this patch, would it be possible to
rebase them over this pushed version?

TIA,

-- 
                                                                Gilles.

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

Reply via email to