On December 17, 2014 3:43:59 AM CST, Sebastian Huber
<sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>
>On 17/12/14 09:55, Daniel Krüger wrote:
>> I am porting the openPOWERLINK stack (Industrial Ethernet protocol
>> implementation) to RTEMS. Because RTEMS includes the POSIX layer, I
>> tried to reuse most of the Linux implementation of openPOWERLINK.
>> When it came to the timers, I discovered some differences of the
>POSIX
>> timer behaviour in RTEMS in respect to Linux. I don't know what the
>> POSIX standard says in that regard.
>
>POSIX is pretty clear in this regard:
>
>http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/timer_create.html
>
>It is a per-process timer, so the current RTEMS implementation is not
>conformant with the POSIX requirements. The question is whether this
>is
>a bug or a feature. If we change the behaviour then we may break
>existing RTEMS applications. I am in favour of enforcing POSIX
>strictly.
Me too. I only saw a few minor things with the patches. I think I saw some "){"
with no space. I am on my tablet so this could be an illusion.
There are two XXX's on error cases. Separate additional patches to just make a
comment we are ignoring the return code and putting a void in front of the call
would be OK. Static analyzers report these as empty body ifs and I want to
eliminate pur historical "I don't know what to do place holders"
Finally, all the tests need to run. Did this break anything?
>
>Can you please open a ticket:
>
>https://devel.rtems.org/newticket
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
