From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4EA1BE4C.5030301@domain.hid> Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:47:40 +0200 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4EA19A9D.1080502@domain.hid> <4EA1B033.6060707@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] rt_task_wait_period returns an undocumented value List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?RmVybmFuZG8gSGVycmVybyBDYXJyw7Nu?= Cc: Xenomai-help@domain.hid On 10/21/2011 08:08 PM, Fernando Herrero Carr=C3=B3n wrote: > Alright, excuse me, I missed that explanation. >=20 > Then let me move to the actual figures at hand: >=20 > $ cat /proc/xenomai/latency > 3349 >=20 > and, as I explained above, all values below 11450 are being rejected in= my > case. I guess you have to check the code to understand what happens. But really, running tasks with a 11500 period is already preposterous. > my point of view. Especially when it refers to documentation, I believe= that > "too much" is never too much. Conciseness is really important for a documentation, look at an example, the sentence explaining the -EINVAL return value for rt_task_make_periodic was a bit long, and you missed the important part, even though I had told you that it was where was the answer to your question. So, too much documentation is a problem, because users will inevitably miss what is important. Now look at an example outside Xenomai documentation: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/pthread_mutex_lo= ck.html The documentation for EINVAL says: [EINVAL] The value specified by mutex does not refer to an initialized mutex object. It does not say, "or an object for which pthread_mutex_init failed", it is pretty obvious that if pthread_mutex_init failed, the mutex is not initialized. period. --=20 Gilles.