On 07/12/17 12:42, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Other than fixing those tests for smp, is it bad to just say the
interrupt disable part of task mode isn't supported in smp?
Here the RTEMS_PREEMPT_MASK and RTEMS_INTERRUPT_MASK are not treated
equally:
if ( rtems_configuration_is_smp_enabled() ) {
if ( mask & RTEMS_PREEMPT_MASK ) {
if ( !_Modes_Is_preempt( mode_set ) ) {
return RTEMS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED;
}
}
if ( mask & RTEMS_INTERRUPT_MASK ) {
return RTEMS_NOT_IMPLEMENTED;
}
}
rtems_task_mode(RTEMS_PREEMPT_MASK, RTEMS_PREEMPT, ...) is ok, but
rtems_task_mode(RTEMS_INTERRUPT_MASK, RTEMS_INTERRUPT_LEVEL(0), ...) is
not ok?
The rtems_task_mode() looks pretty broken now. There should be no:
#if !defined( RTEMS_SMP )
A rtems_configuration_is_smp_enabled() inside a #if !defined( RTEMS_SMP)
block makes no sense.
--
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
