From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <49B55407.9000700@domain.hid> Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:38:15 +0100 From: Philippe Gerum MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <49B3A126.6000602@domain.hid> <49B53AC3.10707@domain.hid> <49B54780.6040504@domain.hid> <49B54D2C.5080001@domain.hid> <49B55175.2070205@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <49B55175.2070205@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] Watchdog / immediate Linux signal delivery 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 Jan Kiszka wrote: > Philippe Gerum wrote: >> Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> Meanwhile I played with some light-weight approach to relax a thread >>> that received a signal (according to do_sigwake_event). Worked, but only >>> once due to a limitation (if not bug) of I-pipe x86: in __ipipe_run_isr, >>> it does not handle the case that a non-root handler may alter the >>> current domain, causing corruptions to the IPIPE_SYNC_FLAG states of the >>> involved domains. >> It is not a bug, this is wanted. ISR must neither change the current >> domain nor migrate CPU; allowing this would open Pandora's box. > > And if there is no way to migrate from within an ISR, we can bury any > attempt to deliver signals to spinning Xenomai threads - or what other > context would remain to Xenomai for triggering migration? > The two-phase solution I have mentioned would work. > Jan > -- Philippe.