From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Philippe Gerum In-Reply-To: <455E0940.7070705@domain.hid> References: <1163784779.4980.47.camel@domain.hid> <455E025B.5030906@domain.hid> <1163790315.4980.73.camel@domain.hid> <455E0940.7070705@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 22:58:02 +0100 Message-Id: <1163800682.4980.81.camel@domain.hid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Xenomai-core] Re: XENO_OPT_DEBUG impact Reply-To: rpm@xenomai.org List-Id: "Xenomai life and development \(bug reports, patches, discussions\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: xenomai-core On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 20:10 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > On Fri, 2006-11-17 at 19:41 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> I'm currently seeing two potential "misuses" of the common switch: > >> > >> - the posix skin (Gilles, how heavy-weighted are those checks?) > >> => CONFIG_XENO_OPT_DEBUG_POSIX > >> > >> - CONFIG_XENO_SPINLOCK_DEBUG => CONFIG_XENO_OPT_DEBUG_SPINLOCK > >> > >> Both should be explicitly controllable in Kconfig. > >> > > > > Nack for CONFIG_XENO_OPT_DEBUG_SPINLOCK. Most of the issue we tracked > > with Gilles regarding the domain migration code had side-effects on the > > nucleus lock. So having CONFIG_XENO_OPT_DEBUG enabled for identifying > > internal state weirdnesses - like those triggered by migration bugs - > > implies enabling the spinlock watchdogs too. > > Ok, if it only makes sense to have both enabled at the same time, then > let us create XENO_OPT_DEBUG_NUCLEUS. It should include both, but it > shall not be automatically on when, say, only XENO_OPT_DEBUG_RTDM is > required. No objection. > > Jan > -- Philippe.