On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 11:26 AM, Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > > > On 15/12/16 23:34, Chris Johns wrote: >> >> On 15/12/2016 18:02, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> >>> On 14/12/16 22:15, Chris Johns wrote: >>>> >>>> On 15/12/2016 00:39, Sebastian Huber wrote: > > [...] >>>> >>>> Would the "tiny" footprint be smaller if all internal services >>>> including compiler thread support are made C11? Could this actually be >>>> done? Parts of POSIX has been creeping in over time so the position is >>>> a little confused at the moment. I am not sure about a bits and pieces >>>> approach, maybe a full switch is made. >>> >>> >>> Yes, the footprint would be smaller. If we provide self-contained >>> threads, then the footprint would be much smaller, e.g. no object >>> administration, no heap. >> >> >> Great. This is a powerful reason to look at moving in this direction and >> removing the remaining POSIX usage in libstdthreads. >> >> A brief audit of rtems.git shows the change is possible with less than 30 >> Classic task creates and a similar number of semaphore creates so a full >> change look reachable which is nice. >> >> Should we look at moving all internal services to C11 and standardise it? >> I think there is value in doing this. It can be a post 4.12 branch activity. > > > In contrast to the C11 mutexes, I don't see a real value in moving from > Classic API tasks to C11 threads. The Classic API you have more control over > task attributes, modes, priority, stack size, etc. > > I created two tickets: > > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2842 > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2843 > > Joel, Gedare, what is your opinion with respect to C11 mutexes? > I haven't fully understood the distinction. I get that C11 are individually (and collectively) smaller. I don't entirely get what is their time-space tradeoff or when they are less desirable. I would like to see a table that compares/contrasts these in a simple way to evaluate. I will try to look closely at these different approaches in a few weeks.
> > -- > Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH > > Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany > Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 > Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 > E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > PGP : Public key available on request. > > Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
