RE: [ECOS] Condition Variables recap

["Trenton D. Adams" <tadams at extremeeng dot com>]

Jonathan Larmour wrote:
  > 
  > Shouldn't only one thread need to process the arrived data? With
  > _broadcast(), all of them will wake up. But still, I don't know your
  > application, so it's up to you. If it works for you, whatever :).
  > 

Actually, I'm looking at my design document, and I only have one thread
accessing the data!  Sorry for the confusion!!!  I asked the question
before I started writing that part of the design document.

  > > Is there any way that two of the threads could accidentally lock a
  > mutex
  > > at the exact same time and not even know it?
  > 
  > No. Unless you misuse the API (e.g. by calling cyg_mutex_trylock()
and
  > don't check the return code).
  > 

cyg_mutex_trylock () is not documented in my documentation.  I assume
I'm not required to call that before the actual locking?



Gary Thomas wrote:
  >  > Is there any way that two of the threads could accidentally lock
a 
  >  > mutex at the exact same time and not even know it?  I would think
that 
  >  > it doesn't really matter as long as the resource required is
meant to 
  >  > be read-only to the consumer threads right?
  > No - if this were possible, then it would not be a mutex!  (mutex =
device for _mutual exclusion_)

Yes, I figured that much, I just wanted to be sure! ;)


Thanks for the info Jonathan and Gary, I think I'm almost ready for some
serious coding!  Assuming I can get that stupid PCMCIA controller to
quit screwing with my head! :)