This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: RedBoot - Bug in _rb_gets()?
However, on closer inspection, I don't think that this really
makes much difference, at least not for RedBoot's main command
loop since it will never call _rb_gets() with a timeout larger
than the "idle" time. It would possibly make a difference for
other routines which might want to use _rb_gets() with a very
large timeout, so I'll leave the change.
On Tue, 2001-10-16 at 08:34, Gary Thomas wrote:
> On Tue, 2001-10-16 at 02:16, Chris Zankel wrote:
> > Gary,
> >
> > Sounds reasonable. But wouldn't that imply that the inner
> > loop is set to at maximum to 50 ms? Right now
> > mon_set_read_char_timeout() sets the timeout to whatever
> > you passed to it.
> > So, what happens right now is, if you do a mon_read_char_with_timeout()
> > with, for example, 1s timeout, that the inner-loop
> > mon_read_char_with_timout() waits 1s and the outer loop
> > loops 1000/50 = 20 times. The whole function waits 20s instead
> > of the specified one second.
> >
> > Wouldn't it make more sense to rewrite that part to:
> >
> > mon_set_read_char_timeout(timeout > 50? 50:timeout);
> >
> > while (timeout > 0) {
> > ...
> > }
>
> Indeed, it does look like it's wrong. I agree with your analysis and
> will make this change to the sources:
>
> Index: redboot/current/src/io.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/cvs/ecc/ecc/redboot/current/src/io.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.36
> diff -u -5 -p -r1.36 io.c
> --- redboot/current/src/io.c 23 Aug 2001 21:27:13 -0000 1.36
> +++ redboot/current/src/io.c 15 Oct 2001 23:24:00 -0000
> @@ -295,19 +295,20 @@ _rb_gets(char *buf, int buflen, int time
> if (getc_script(&c))
> do_idle(false);
> else
> #endif
> if ((timeout > 0) && (ptr == buf)) {
> - mon_set_read_char_timeout(timeout);
> +#define MIN_TIMEOUT 50
> + mon_set_read_char_timeout(timeout > MIN_TIMEOUT ? MIN_TIMEOUT : timeout);
> while (timeout > 0) {
> res = mon_read_char_with_timeout(&c);
> if (res) {
> // Got a character
> do_idle(false);
> break;
> }
> - timeout -= 50;
> + timeout -= MIN_TIMEOUT;
> }
> if (res == false) {
> do_idle(true);
> return _GETS_TIMEOUT; // Input timed out
> }
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris
> >
> > Gary Thomas wrote:
> >
> > >>Although the timeout value for the mon_read_char_with_timeout()
> > >>function has already been set to a <timeout> value the while
> > >>loop also loops over this <timeout> variable:
> > >>
> > >>...
> > >> mon_set_read_char_timeout(timeout);
> > >>
> > >> while (timeout > 0) {
> > >> res = mon_read_char_with_timeout(&c);
> > >> if (res) { ... }
> > >> timeout -= 50;
> > >> }
> > >>...
> > >>
> > >
> > > There are two separate "timeout"s at work here. The innermost one is
> > > what is used by the read_char function to decide if a character has
> > > arrived within some period of time. The outermost is used by RedBoot
> > > to allow it to do some things while waiting for characters to arrive
> > > and will be much larger (orders of magnitude) than the innermost
> > > timeout. The idea is for RedBoot to see if a character has arrived
> > > or wait at most the "innermost" time. If no character has arrived, then
> > > RedBoot can take on some "background" processing, e.g. checking for
> > > any arriving network connections, blanking LCD screens, etc.
> > >
> >