On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 02:19:47PM +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 07/06/2011 01:42 PM, Andrey Nechypurenko wrote:
> > 
> > What makes me worry here is the IPC abbreviation - I have just one
> > process with multiple threads. So would not real IPC mechanism be the
> > overkill in this scenario? Or am I just misinterpret what IPC means
> > here?

...

> 
> I am talking about the ring buffer thing with head and tail pointers
> where each thread (consumer, producer), moves only one pointer. I would
> call this a "lockless fifo", though I do not know what the official name
> is, but you get the idea. Again, you can send pointers through an IPC
> instead of sending the data themselves, and you will benefit from the
> fact that the two threads are running in the same memory space.

In Andrey's case, I would simply use a ring buffer (fifo) shared
between one RT and one non-RT thread. No locking is needed, and it is
easy to implement. You don't need a library for that.

HTH,

Richard

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help

Reply via email to