From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <53624587.40005@xenomai.org> Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 15:00:55 +0200 From: Philippe Gerum MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1398502711.53016.YahooMailNeo@web171601.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <535B8B43.1000109@xenomai.org> <535BDB20.7070100@xenomai.org> <1398944980.54240.YahooMailNeo@web171603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <5362437D.2030802@xenomai.org> In-Reply-To: <5362437D.2030802@xenomai.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] Issue in notifier_callback while threadobj_lock is being held (forge/mercury) List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Matthias Schneider , "xenomai@xenomai.org" On 05/01/2014 02:52 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: > On 05/01/2014 01:49 PM, Matthias Schneider wrote: > >> On a first glance the commit seems to work find - I am still verifying. >> Simplifying the suspend handling, would sending a SIGNOTIFY signal >> straight >> to the signal handler instead of using pipe read/write operations be an >> equivalent, even simpler alternative as demonstrated in the attached >> patch? >> > > IIRC, the reason to base the logic on fasync handling was primarily to > allow for extending the scheme to multi-processing setups (copperplate > provides mechanisms for sharing most of its core objects between > processes). Typically, using an AF_UNIX named socket instead of an > anonymous pipe would have made possible to notify threads which belong > to different processes the same way. Plus: passing parameters to the notification messages, which we would not be able to do using plain signaling. There are a few inter-process requests we still need to implement via the notification system. Once they are more specifically framed and scoped, we may get back to this optimization. Maybe we could use a mixed approach as well. -- Philippe.