From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <54E76A59.4060000@siemens.com> Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 18:09:45 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <54E765A4.20909@xenomai.org> In-Reply-To: <54E765A4.20909@xenomai.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] [Xenomai-git] Jan Kiszka : cobalt/posix/syscall: Exclude sc_cobalt_get_current from debug warnings List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Philippe Gerum , xenomai@xenomai.org, xenomai-git@xenomai.org On 2015-02-20 17:49, Philippe Gerum wrote: > On 02/20/2015 04:53 PM, git repository hosting wrote: >> Module: xenomai-jki >> Branch: for-forge >> Commit: fc2d70475f4f86da30e68a569e7641982f4dd8e1 >> URL: http://git.xenomai.org/?p=xenomai-jki.git;a=commit;h=fc2d70475f4f86da30e68a569e7641982f4dd8e1 >> >> Author: Jan Kiszka >> Date: Fri Feb 20 16:50:15 2015 +0100 >> >> cobalt/posix/syscall: Exclude sc_cobalt_get_current from debug warnings >> >> This syscall is used for probing the context, thus may be triggered by >> non-RT threads as well which we should not report as potential error. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka >> > > This would mean that sc_cobalt_get_current is considered valid from any > process, including those which did not issue sc_cobalt_bind in the first > place. > > Do we depend on this today, or are we granting an extended access with > this patch? This is just to silence a warning you get, e.g., with the smokey fork test. I don't think it should be illegal to call such a service, even prior to binding to the interface. It is already robust against it, isn't it? Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux