From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8089 invoked by alias); 27 Jun 2013 17:07:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-devel-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-devel-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Received: (qmail 8078 invoked by uid 89); 27 Jun 2013 17:07:19 -0000 X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 Received: from dub0-omc1-s20.dub0.hotmail.com (HELO dub0-omc1-s20.dub0.hotmail.com) (157.55.0.219) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.84/v0.84-167-ge50287c) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 17:07:18 +0000 Received: from DUB124-W16 ([157.55.0.237]) by dub0-omc1-s20.dub0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Thu, 27 Jun 2013 10:07:15 -0700 X-TMN: [hR/vAMCA6LtvECN5OBUQtD9P11tZoytv] Message-ID: From: Bernd Edlinger To: "j.lambrecht@televic.com" CC: "ecos-devel@ecos.sourceware.org" Subject: FW: RFC: bsd_tcpip patch on synch.c Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 17:07:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: <51CC0714.6040805@televic.com>,,,<51CC4A34.1070107@televic.com>, Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2013-06/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 J=FCrgen, > After digging deep, I found that our problem was caused by something=20 > else, so this fix is not needed, but we kept it because we did not like=20 > that construct as you also point out. >> >> If you really expect cyg_mutex_lock to ever return false, >> then the right thing to do would be to assert(false) >> and print a callstack or directly enter the debugger. > No problem anymore.. > But is there a better way to loop over the mutex lock? no, IMHO a simple "cyg_mutex_lock(&spl_mutex);" would have been enough. But these patches are not about style at all. But by the way there is another patch in that vicinitry: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D1001629 That may apply to everyone who uses a tick count other than the default. Regards Bernd.=20=09=09=20=09=20=20=20=09=09=20=20