From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jesper Skov <jskov@redhat.com>
To: Jonathan Larmour <jlarmour@redhat.com>
Cc: Jesper Skov <jskov@redhat.com>, Paleologos Spanos <paleolog@ee.ucla.edu>, ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [ECOS] Unique priorities
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:31:00 -0000
Message-id: <14941.60868.749671.374067@thinktwice.zoftcorp.dk>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10101101612370.20633-100000@sierra.ee.ucla.edu> <ot8zoi8r0a.fsf@thinktwice.zoftcorp.dk> <3A5DE5C4.33B37AA0@redhat.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-01/msg00190.html

>>>>> "Jonathan" == Jonathan Larmour <jlarmour@redhat.com> writes:

Jonathan> Jesper Skov wrote:
>>  >>>>> "Paleologos" == Paleologos Spanos <paleolog@ee.ucla.edu>
>> writes:
Paleologos> mlqueues default scheduler).  I would expect that I would
Paleologos> have an error or something like that because of the fact
Paleologos> that the 2 threads are having the same priority (4).Is it
Paleologos> correct or I have misunderstood something?
>>  The bitmap scheduler will assign a thread the closest possible
>> priority to that requested. It does not fail if the requested
>> priority is already used, it just returns another. So your threads
>> would probably have priorities 4 and 5.

Jonathan> Jesper are you sure about that? From bitmap.cxx

Cyg_SchedThread_Implementation::Cyg_SchedThread_Implementation
(
    CYG_ADDRWORD sched_info
)
{
    CYG_REPORT_FUNCTION();

#if 1
    // Assign this thread's priority to the supplied sched_info
    // or the next highest priority available.
    
    priority = cyg_priority(sched_info);

    while( !Cyg_Scheduler::scheduler.unique(priority) )
        priority++;
    
#else    
    // Assign initial priorities to threads in descending order of
    // creation.

    static cyg_priority init_priority = 0;
    
    priority = init_priority++;
#endif
    
}

Yup :)  It haunted the stress_threads test for a while as it didn't
get the priorities it had asked for.

But it's not good that those two are not consistent. File a bug?

Jesper