This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: cyg_semaphore_post
- From: Jonathan Larmour <jlarmour at redhat dot com>
- To: "Woller, Thomas" <tom dot woller at cirrus dot com>
- Cc: 'Robin Farine' <robin dot farine at acn-group dot ch>,Stijn Symons <stijn dot symons at acunia dot com>,eCos users <ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 13:48:55 +0000
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] cyg_semaphore_post
- Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd.
- References: <973C11FE0E3ED41183B200508BC7774C022FBA8D@csexchange.crystal.cirrus.com>
"Woller, Thomas" wrote:
>
> we are also wondering how to handle the non-priority based (ie.
> FIFO based) waiting under eCos. when there are a series of
> threads waiting on the same semaphore, we basically want the
> highest priority thread to run, NOT the first one that happened
> to wait on the semaphore. some of our current s/w on another
> RTOS that we are porting over currently supports both FIFO and
> priority based semaphores/mutexes.
You should be able to get this behaviour using the
CYGIMP_KERNEL_SCHED_SORTED_QUEUES option. With this option enabled (it is
by default disabled), thread queues (as used to queue threads waiting for
semaphores) are sorted in thread priority order.
Jifl
--
Red Hat, Rustat House, Clifton Road, Cambridge, UK. Tel: +44 (1223) 271062
Maybe this world is another planet's Hell -Aldous Huxley || Opinions==mine
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss