On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:09 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> Remove _Thread_queue_Extract_with_proxy() and move the proxy extraction
> to _Thread_MP_Extract_proxy(). Move similar code blocks of the previous
> caller of _Thread_queue_Extract_with_proxy() to helper functions.
>
> Update #4546.
> ---
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:09 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> The _Thread_queue_Extract() does not deal with potential priority
> updates and the SMP locking protocol handling. Use
> _Thread_queue_Continue(). For the POSIX signals processing this is
> currently probably unnecessary, however, the u
This looks ok, along with the copyright clean-up. In the future please
separate non-functional (style, copyright, etc) changes from
functional patches to simplify review/approval/revision process.
One question I do have from this: the minimum APPROX size is 180
(+CPU_PER_CPU_CONTROL_SIZE + CPU_INT
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:13 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> These functions are a faster alternative to _RBTree_Insert_inline() if
> it is known that the new node is the maximum/minimum node.
>
> Update #4531.
> ---
> cpukit/include/rtems/score/rbtreeimpl.h | 26 +++
> cpukit/score/src/rb
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:13 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> Update #4531.
> ---
> cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulersmpimpl.h | 18 ++
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulersmpimpl.h
> b/cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulersmpim
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:13 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> Rework the handling of the affine ready queue for the EDF SMP scheduler.
> Do the queue handling in the node insert, move, and extract operations.
> Remove the queue handling from _Scheduler_EDF_SMP_Allocate_processor().
>
> Update #4531.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:13 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> If a node is moved from the scheduled chain to the ready queue, then we
> know that it is the highest priority ready node. So, it can be
> prepended to the ready queue without doing any comparisons.
>
I'm not certain on the logic here. I
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:14 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> Update #4531.
> ---
> cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulersmpimpl.h | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulersmpimpl.h
> b/cpukit/include/rtems/score/schedulersmpimpl.h
> index 499
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:13 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> This patch fixes the following broken behaviour:
>
> While a thread is scheduled on a helping scheduler, while it does not
> own a MrsP semaphore, if it obtains a MrsP semaphore, then no
> scheduler node using an idle thread and the
Hi
Looking over the build sweep failures, I spotted this one
(https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/build/2021-November/030118.html)
which would lean to their being a floor on older distributions. There
is a software collection for a gcc8 for CentOS 7 but do we want to
require it? This is for x86_64 t
Hi
Looking in https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/build/2021-November/030083.html,
I'm not sure what explains this error:
CC libfdt/fdt.o
libfdt/fdt.c: In function 'fdt_ro_probe_':
libfdt/fdt.c:27:11: error: 'FDT_ERR_ALIGNMENT' undeclared (first use
in this function)
return -FDT_ERR_ALIGNMENT;
Hi
This looks like we need to bump the hash, submit a patch, or change to
building with -Wno-error
(https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/build/2021-November/030047.html).
Any ideas?
FYI Chris.. this one may be on you to see if a hash bump fixes it.
/usr/bin/cc -O2 -pipe -fbracket-depth=1024
-I/opt/
ok other than my comments. nothing looked major.
On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 10:14 AM Sebastian Huber
wrote:
>
> The SMP EDF scheduler supports a one-to-one and one-to-all thread to
> processor affinity. It accepted affinity sets which are a proper
> subset of the online processor containing at least
Hi,
indeed, centos 7 is bundled with gcc 4.8.5. Now, the question is, is
centos 7 still supported by RTEMS? If so, then we will need to invent
some machinery to check not only for commands but also for versions in
cfg files? Also if we're doing this we need to check firmly we're really
on old ce
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021, 6:50 PM Karel Gardas wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> indeed, centos 7 is bundled with gcc 4.8.5. Now, the question is, is
> centos 7 still supported by RTEMS? If so, then we will need to invent
> some machinery to check not only for commands but also for versions in
> cfg files? Also if
15 matches
Mail list logo