On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 13:31 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 13:16 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > >> I was not talking about the Xenomai case specifically, but since Henri > >> would like to have the full signals implementation with Xenomai, this > >> does a apply to Xenomai too. > >> > >> > > > > I think we all agree that having a complete signal implementation for > > Xenomai in pure rt mode won't happen overnight. So the point is now: how > > could it be mimicked, at least for the most useful part. > > > > My point is that whatever you do, a switch user-kernel, then kernel-user > is not going to be lightweight, so avoiding it in the application in the > first place may be a better idea.
Sometimes you can't decide what the application code wants, that is the issue. > > My aim with implementing complete signals was rather for things like > timer_* and mq_notify, where the interface requires them, I did not even > imagine implementing SIGFPE, SIGILL, SIGTRAP, which I thought could not > be time critical anyway, for the reasons explained earlier. So, my > question (rather to Henri) is: what would we need SIGFPE, SIGILL, > SIGTRAP in an real-time application for? > -- Philippe. _______________________________________________ Xenomai-help mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help
