From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <475E8DAE.9070405@domain.hid> Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:16:30 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ignacio_Garc=EDa_P=E9rez?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <475E76A0.4010007@domain.hid> <475E7CBA.7060300@domain.hid> <475E7F84.1040600@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <475E7F84.1040600@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Application broken 2.3.4 ---> 2.4.0 List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Jan Kiszka escribi=F3: > That's due to the reworked timer subsystem: Starting timers (like the > periodic task timer) in the past is reported as error - up to the > application in this case. One may discuss if this case can be considere= d > as an undocumented API change (I haven't re-read the docs in this regar= d > yet). > =20 I correct myself. The API actually states that the -ETIMEDOUT error code=20 will be return if passed idate is in the past. But that is true for the=20 2.3.x series and for the new 2.4.0 version. Which means that the true difference between 2.3.x and 2.4.0 is that: 2.3.x: returns -ETIMEDOUT but schedules the task for immediate execution. 2.4.0: returns -ETIMEDOUT and *does not* schedule the task for immediate=20 execution. The more I think about it the mode I think this is a bug. I just can't think of a situation in which idate is in the past and it=20 makes sense *not scheduling* the task for immediate execution...