In article ,
Charles Cui wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>man pages for sched_protect
>https://github.com/ycui1984/posixtestsuite/commit/50450adf1a890965440d6e1bf9c6f113a247867e
Thanks, fixed and committed...
christos
re easily for me to make a breakthrough. Sounds good?
> I will let you guys know my progress.
>
>
> Thanks, Charles.
>
> 2016-07-04 23:24 GMT+08:00 Christos Zoulas :
>
>> On Jul 4, 4:34pm, mar...@duskware.de (Martin Husemann) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
mar...@duskware.de (Martin Husemann) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 10:27:52AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | > SCHED_SPORADIC is also a feature that not many things use. So let's
> either
> | > try to make the PSHARED semaphores work
On Jul 4, 4:34pm, mar...@duskware.de (Martin Husemann) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 10:27:52AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| > SCHED_SPORADIC is also a feature that not many things use. So let's either
| > try to make the PSHARED semaphores wo
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 10:27:52AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> SCHED_SPORADIC is also a feature that not many things use. So let's either
> try to make the PSHARED semaphores work for real (easier) or go for the
> realtime signal implementation (harder). Let's see what others think soo.
I agre
On Jul 4, 10:36am, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Yes, I can add the man pages for _sched_protect, mmap support is the missing
| features at the bottom of this doc,
| https://github.com/ycui1984/posixtestsuite/blob/master/errors.txt
Nobody has
CHED_SPORADIC
> scheduling class or cross process synchronization?
>
>
> 2016-07-03 22:10 GMT+08:00 Christos Zoulas :
>
>> On Jul 1, 3:32pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>>
>> | Hi Christos,
>> |
>
nt me to focus? signal, mmap,
> SCHED_SPORADIC scheduling class or cross process synchronization?
>
>
>
> 2016-07-03 22:10 GMT+08:00 Christos Zoulas :
>
>> On Jul 1, 3:32pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
On Jul 1, 3:32pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Hi Christos,
|
| I have spend several days of thinking how to design a unit test to prove
| the usefulness of
| the priority protect patch and here are some updates of the new unit tests.
| After
ulas :
>
>> On Jun 24, 1:56pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>>
>> | Hi Christos,
>> |
>> |This test generates a deadlock. t1 holds resource m1 and waits for
>> m2,
>> | t2 holds resource m
Yeah, I will try to construct a new test.
Thanks, Charles.
2016-06-22 15:28 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 22, 3:11pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Thanks Christos for these comments!
> | In terms of the new fi
On Jun 24, 1:56pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Hi Christos,
|
|This test generates a deadlock. t1 holds resource m1 and waits for m2,
| t2 holds resource m2 and waits for m1.
| Is this the result that you want to generate?
That is
Hi Christos,
This test generates a deadlock. t1 holds resource m1 and waits for m2,
t2 holds resource m2 and waits for m1.
Is this the result that you want to generate?
2016-06-24 6:05 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> In article 7dw...@mail.gmail.com>,
> Charles Cui wrote:
> >-=-=-=-=-=-
> >
In article ,
Charles Cui wrote:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>I tried to implement the unit test proposed by Christos, but needs more
>clarifications.
>Let me first describe my understanding of your test.
>First created a thread with low priority, and let it grab the mutex. After
>this step, you expect the thr
1:23pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Any comments on the tests?
>
> Yes, I am not finished yet testing and looking. Here are some preliminary
> ones:
>
> 1. You've added more fields to sched_params. This should no
n scheduling.
>
> Thanks, Charles
>
> 2016-06-20 18:58 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
>
>> On Jun 20, 1:07pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>>
>> | I have write a draft of the benchmark, but have not verifie
provide the test?
Thanks Charles.
2016-06-22 14:53 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 22, 1:23pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Any comments on the tests?
>
> Yes, I am not finished yet testing and looking. Here are some
On Jun 22, 3:11pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Thanks Christos for these comments!
| In terms of the new fields exposed by sched_param, those are only for
| testing convenience, if we decide to expose those to users, we need to
| consider
On Jun 22, 1:23pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Any comments on the tests?
Yes, I am not finished yet testing and looking. Here are some preliminary
ones:
1. You've added more fields to sched_params. This should not be done li
:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 17, 10:45am, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Yeah, that makes sense. I will see how to construct such a unit test(or
> | call it benchmark)
>
> How's that coming along? Also can you plea
com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | I have write a draft of the benchmark, but have not verified successfully
> | on the patched system.
> | The idea is to
> | 1. create a mutexattr data structure and set pthread priority protect
> | protocol.
On Jun 20, 1:07pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| I have write a draft of the benchmark, but have not verified successfully
| on the patched system.
| The idea is to
| 1. create a mutexattr data structure and set pthread priority protect
On Jun 17, 10:45am, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Yeah, that makes sense. I will see how to construct such a unit test(or
| call it benchmark)
How's that coming along? Also can you please prepare a short summary of
what you've done
arles Cui :
> Thanks, I will complete my test cases as soon as possible.
>
> 2016-06-14 16:02 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
>
>> On Jun 14, 3:50pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
>> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>>
>> | I got it. Thanks C
Yeah, that makes sense. I will see how to construct such a unit test(or
call it benchmark)
Thanks, Charles.
2016-06-17 10:44 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 16, 9:28pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Hi Christos,
> |
Thanks, I will complete my test cases as soon as possible.
2016-06-14 16:02 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 14, 3:50pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | I got it. Thanks Christos.
>
> And here it is:
>
> http://
Hi Christos,
Please find my comments below.
2016-06-14 9:50 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> In article <
> ca+sxe9s4by1klxgxuwwgdv+0_z-balpbg2woeg18tfyg1yw...@mail.gmail.com>,
> Charles Cui wrote:
> >
> >Let me know if there are problems. In the next several days, I will try to
> >add some u
I got it. Thanks Christos.
2016-06-14 15:43 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 14, 2:25pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | One thing I guess you can commit is pthread_condattr_getclock and it's
> | man pages.
>
On Jun 14, 3:50pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| I got it. Thanks Christos.
And here it is:
http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/pthread20160614.diff
christos
On Jun 14, 2:25pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| One thing I guess you can commit is pthread_condattr_getclock and it's
| man pages.
I will wait on that; let me get you my proposed patch back.
| Actually it does not related with ad&#x
2016-06-14 14:14 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 14, 1:29pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | 1. add unit tests for ad's work to make sure it works well.
> | 2. may add some changes according to your comments
On Jun 14, 1:29pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| 1. add unit tests for ad's work to make sure it works well.
| 2. may add some changes according to your comments on PTHREAD_STACK_MIN.
Yes, and for me is to post my diffs of your chang
In article ,
Charles Cui wrote:
>
>Let me know if there are problems. In the next several days, I will try to
>add some unit tests.
>After adding the unit tests, I will continue the work of real time signals.
They mostly look fine. I am not sure that stuff has ever been tested
this is why we nee
.
After adding the unit tests, I will continue the work of real time signals.
Thanks, Charles.
2016-06-10 16:29 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 10, 2:37pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Thanks, Christos, I will read Fre
Please see my comments inline.
2016-06-10 16:29 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas :
> On Jun 10, 2:37pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
>
> | Thanks, Christos, I will read FreeBSD related code carefully.
>
> In the meantime also:
>
On Jun 10, 4:58pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| I will add them. They are missing now.
Good. Thanks. Unit-tests would be good too, and they will show you how
to write atf tests...
| It is finished and worked well.
| Here is the patch
Great
On Jun 10, 2:37pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Thanks, Christos, I will read FreeBSD related code carefully.
In the meantime also:
- there are no man pages or tests for PRIOPROTECT_AND_GETCLOCK
- there are no man pages or tests for PTHREAD
On Jun 9, 5:35pm, charles.cui1...@gmail.com (Charles Cui) wrote:
-- Subject: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
| Hi guys,
|
|I am trying to add the support of SIGQUEUE_MAX, which is the maximal
| number of real time signals to the target process. There are several ways
| to
| send a signal to a process like,
38 matches
Mail list logo
