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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

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

Reply via email to