This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Why to signal condvar with mutex held?
- From: Sergei Organov <osv at topconrd dot ru>
- To: sandeep <shimple0 at yahoo dot com>
- Cc: Nick Garnett <nickg at ecoscentric dot com>, ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 14 Dec 2004 19:53:57 +0300
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] Why to signal condvar with mutex held?
- References: <20041214125757.9801.qmail@web52708.mail.yahoo.com>
sandeep <shimple0@yahoo.com> writes:
> > > what about keeping the waitlists sorted in decreasing priority order of
> > > threads, when you go with idea of wait morphing? won't this ensure that
> > > highest priority waiting thread gets the mutex?
> >
> > As far as I know, priority (as opposed to FIFO) wait queues is a
> > separate configuration option in eCos, so you can have them even now if
> yup. there is CYGIMP_KERNEL_SCHED_SORTED_QUEUES in scheduler.cdl that
> is disabled by default (not much varied configuration from default, i
> have explored, as controlled by needs), but the description of that is
> slightly off.
It's broken and I've already reported this, see:
<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss/2004-11/msg00372.html>
--
Sergei.
--
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss