From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <44527E39.7090501@domain.hid> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:42:33 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Have condition variables Priority Inheritance Protection (PIP)? References: <200604281736.28169.lbocseg@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <200604281736.28169.lbocseg@domain.hid> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigCF928EFEF6E38D6F9B507857" Sender: jan.kiszka@domain.hid List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigCF928EFEF6E38D6F9B507857 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote: > Hi, > Having a look at cond.c in the native skin, I didn't understand why it = is not=20 > passed the PIP flag to xnsynch_init(). I mean, why the code is not=20 > xnsynch_init(&cond->synch_base,XNSYNCH_PIP); >=20 > instead of >=20 > xnsynch_init(&cond->synch_base,XNSYNCH_PRIO); >=20 > ? >=20 > Could someone please point me the reason? >=20 Just as with semaphores: there is no ownership concept for condition variables. Thus, who should be boosted to your priority in case you decide to wait on such a resource? Jan --------------enigCF928EFEF6E38D6F9B507857 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEUn45niDOoMHTA+kRAgfQAJ9I5GuFsYJ1IFs9+6haa9aEfPbN/wCcDTDw QD4A8njhfv3be74QwzXFs4A= =4aY3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigCF928EFEF6E38D6F9B507857--