From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] What returns rt_task_self in relation to rt_task_create From: Philippe Gerum In-Reply-To: <45648B19.70800@domain.hid> References: <20403318.1164195534169.JavaMail.ngmail@domain.hid> <45643CC4.1000201@domain.hid> <1164199940.5006.270.camel@domain.hid> <45644D39.10007@domain.hid> <1164204035.5006.305.camel@domain.hid> <456458BC.2060407@domain.hid> <1164205345.5006.329.camel@domain.hid> <45647C2B.1070208@domain.hid> <1164214987.5006.390.camel@domain.hid> <45648B19.70800@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 19:33:01 +0100 Message-Id: <1164220382.5006.415.camel@domain.hid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: rpm@xenomai.org List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org, Jan Kiszka On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 18:38 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 17:34 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > > > >>Philippe Gerum wrote: > >> > >>>On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 15:03 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>>>Philippe Gerum wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 14:14 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >>>>>We could add that, and the same stuff upon return from the task body > >>>>>inside the trampoline call, but the only way to solve this with no leak > >>>>>would be to call the nucleus at each invocation, and not use any cached > >>>>>descriptor here. Since TLS requires to be operated by the owning task, > >>>>>there is no point in trying to have a deleted task clean those up > >>>>>thoroughly. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>When creating a TLS key, you can specify a cleanup function that get > >>>>called when a thread exits (or is canceled). > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>>Actually, there are spots where the nucleus forces do_exit() over the > >>>caller, and specifically, when we zap a shadow from the Xenomai context, > >>>then perform a tail scheduling for this zombie over the incoming Linux > >>>context. In such situation, the user-space would not even be informed of > >>>what's been going on, so the cleanup routine would be useless. > >> > >>IIRC, rt_task_delete calls pthread_cancel, > > > > > > Not in the case of self deletion, it seems. > > Is there any reason not to use pthread_exit for self deletion ? > I don't see any. -- Philippe.