On 04/03/15 20:24, Joel Sherrill wrote:
This same pattern is in other places so please do it globally across
>>>this patch.
>>>I think I spotted a total of four places.
>>>
>>>Also since this indicates that the thread is at the pseudo-interrupt
>>>priority,
>>>maybe a macro/static inline with a
On 3/4/2015 12:55 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 04/03/15 16:44, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Joel Sherrill
>> wrote:
>>> On 3/4/2015 9:07 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Previously, the _Thread_Heir was updated unconditionally in case a new
heir was determined.
On 04/03/15 16:44, Gedare Bloom wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
On 3/4/2015 9:07 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
Previously, the _Thread_Heir was updated unconditionally in case a new
heir was determined. The _Thread_Dispatch_necessary was only updated in
case the exe
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Joel Sherrill
wrote:
>
>
> On 3/4/2015 9:07 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> Previously, the _Thread_Heir was updated unconditionally in case a new
>> heir was determined. The _Thread_Dispatch_necessary was only updated in
>> case the executing thread was preemptible
On 3/4/2015 9:07 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Previously, the _Thread_Heir was updated unconditionally in case a new
> heir was determined. The _Thread_Dispatch_necessary was only updated in
> case the executing thread was preemptible or an internal thread was
> unblocked. Change this to update
Previously, the _Thread_Heir was updated unconditionally in case a new
heir was determined. The _Thread_Dispatch_necessary was only updated in
case the executing thread was preemptible or an internal thread was
unblocked. Change this to update the _Thread_Heir and
_Thread_Dispatch_necessary only
