[Bug 1636] Refactor Rate Monotonic Manager into a generic Periodic Manager

[bugzilla-daemon at rtems.org]

https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1636

--- Comment #9 from Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill at oarcorp.com> 2010-08-12 06:53:07 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > + If I am right, I think you rename rate_monotonic_period_XXX
> > to rate_periodic_XXX and I can't accept that part of the patch. This
> > would break API compatibility and although it can be argued that
> > the rate monotonic name obscures the fundamental nature of the periodic
> > blocking service being implemented, it is really the theoretical reason
> > this manager exists.  So can your periodicXXX be moved to ratemonXXX and
> > fixed?
> > 
> Actually I copied rtems_rate_monotonic_XXX to rtems_periodic_XXX, and turned
> the rtems_rate_monotonic_XXX into a wrapper that simply calls the
> rtems_periodic_XXX routine.  This maintains the existing API, while enabling
> new applications to use the more generic Periodic routines.  I guess if this is
> OK then I should create user documentation for the rtems_periodic_XXX API
> routines.

What does the rtems_periodic_XXX add over the rtems_rate_monotonic_XXX?
Is it just a name change? Is there functionality? What is the reason?

I recall the code I reviewed still had lots of code in the
rtems_rate_monotonic_XXX services. I think you are doing
something like this:

rtems_rate_monotonic_xXX
  rtems_periodic_XXX
    SCORE Period

If that's the case, I would expect the rtems_periodic_XXX layer to
be fairly thin and the rtems_rate_monotonic_XXX to be even thinner.

I am just confused and can't judge the value of the API level
changes properly.

> > + You can't have objects with Ids in the score.  They all have to take
> > pointers.  You combine score handlers with object control structure to
> > create API level objects.  So this periodic thing in the core needs to
> > change to more of a support service.  I think it is close.  I suspect 
> > you just need to remove the Object_Control field from the structure
> > and add it at the ratemon level.  You never really used the id anyway
> > as best I can tell.
> > 
> OK I think I can fix this.  This was a relic of simply copying the Rate
> Monotonic implementation into the score. I think that I can fix this part easy
> enough.

For sure, this new score object is a good thing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://www.rtems.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.