From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4CD340E0.7020109@domain.hid>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2010 00:25:20 +0100
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix <gilles.chanteperdrix@xenomai.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4CC82C8D.3080808@domain.hid>	<4CD1509A.3000908@domain.hid>	<4CD152F3.4080203@domain.hid>	<4CD16654.6080704@domain.hid>	<4CD18782.7090607@domain.hid>	<4CD191EE.7000604@domain.hid>	<4CD1936E.50203@domain.hid>	<4CD1BA29.9000303@domain.hid>	<1288816871.1842.84.camel@domain.hid>	<4CD1DC1B.8060407@domain.hid>	<4CD1DE12.5010309@domain.hid>	<4CD1E890.5010702@domain.hid>
	<4CD1EC2F.4040603@domain.hid>	<4CD1ED16.8030103@domain.hid>
	<4CD1EDA8.10007@domain.hid>	<4CD1F33C.5070208@domain.hid>
	<4CD1F3F5.5080505@domain.hid>	<4CD1F4FE.9020908@domain.hid>
	<4CD1F69B.9070100@domain.hid>	<4CD1F906.1070703@domain.hid>
	<4CD1FABD.1080301@domain.hid>	<4CD2612C.2070507@domain.hid>
	<4CD279F7.7070502@domain.hid>	<4CD27C46.8010302@domain.hid>
	<4CD27DC2.7060607@domain.hid>	<4CD2A96B.3080001@domain.hid>
	<4CD2B2A7.9010900@domain.hid>	<4CD2C50F.1090604@domain.hid>
	<4CD2C8E2.9090608@domain.hid>	<4CD2D25D.6000604@domain.hid>
	<4CD32EF1.7000202@domain.hid> <4CD33D59.1010003@domain.hid>
In-Reply-To: <4CD33D59.1010003@domain.hid>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] Potential problem with rt_eepro100
List-Id: Xenomai life and development <xenomai.xenomai.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mail.gna.org/options/xenomai-core>,
	<mailto:xenomai-core-request@domain.hid>
List-Archive: </public/xenomai-core>
List-Post: <mailto:xenomai@xenomai.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xenomai-core-request@domain.hid>
List-Subscribe: <https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core>,
	<mailto:xenomai-core-request@domain.hid>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>
Cc: "xenomai@xenomai.org" <xenomai@xenomai.org>

Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Am 04.11.2010 23:08, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> rework. Safer for now is likely to revert 56ff4329ff, keeping nucleus
>>> debugging off.
>> That is not enough.
> 
> It is, I've reviewed the code today.

The fallouts I am talking about are:
47dac49c71e89b684203e854d1b0172ecacbc555
38f2ca83a8e63cc94eaa911ff1c0940c884b5078
5e7cfa5c25672e4478a721eadbd6f6c5b4f88a2f


> 
>> This commit was followed by several others to "fix
>> the fix". You know how things are, someone proposes a fix, which fixes
>> things for him, but it breaks in the other people configurations (one of
>> the fallouts was a complete revamp of include/asm-arm/atomic.h for
>> instance).
>>
> 
> I've pushed a series that reverts that commit, then fixes and cleans up
> on top of it. Just pushed if you want to take a look. We can find some
> alternative debugging mechanism independently (though I'm curious to see
> it - it still makes no sense to me).

Since the fix is simply a modification to what we have currently. I
would prefer if we did not remove it. In fact, I think it would be
simpler if we started from what we currently have than reverting past
patches.

-- 
                                                                Gilles.