On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 3:27 AM, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote:
> On 13/07/2016 4:16 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Since this rtems_iterate_over_all_threads() is documented in the user > > manual should we keep it as is and just add a new variant? > > I would prefer we fix the current API because what you can do with it as > it stands is limited. > > +1 > Locking the object allocator lock changes things and requires people > review their usage. Maybe a change is a good thing. > > There shouldn't be many (if any) external (outside our tree) uses of this anyway. It might be a good way to find them. > > There is also a related ticket: > > > > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2423 > > Oh yes it is, I did not notice this. Hmmm. > > This is a difficult interface to place in the RTEMS API because it > crosses a boundaries with the SCORE. The argument for the visitor > function is an SCORE type and the function is declared in the SCORE's > thread.h header which is not good to see slip into the code. I question > it being documented here and this way. > > A user is exposed to any changes in the SCORE implementation of the > Thread_Control so it is difficult to make this API always stable. > > Chris > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
