On 2011-06-20 21:41, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > On 06/20/2011 09:38 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2011-06-20 19:33, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>> On 06/20/2011 06:43 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> On 2011-06-19 17:41, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >>>>> Merged your whole branch, but took the liberty to change it a bit >>>>> (replacing the commit concerning unlocked context switches with comments >>>>> changes only, and changing the commit about xntbase_tick). >>>> >>>> What makes splmax() redundant for the unlocked context switch case? IMO >>>> that bug is still present. >>> >>> No, the bug is between my keyboard and chair. On architectures with >>> unlocked context switches, the Linux task switch still happens with irqs >>> off, only the mm switch happens with irqs on. >> >> Then why do we call xnlock_get_irqsave in >> xnsched_finish_unlocked_switch? Why not simply xnlock_get if irqs are >> off anyway? > > Because of the Xenomai task switch, not the Linux task switch.
--verbose please. Jan
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomaiemail@example.com https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core