Re: RTEMS | Draft: posix: Add mq_ispriority to mq_attr for per‑queue discipline selection (!1084)

[Xinhong Hu (@aptacc2421)]

Xinhong Hu commented: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1084#note_146981


Hi @joel , @gedare , 

I’ve added two additional test scenarios:

* same-priority blocking 
* mixed priority (low → high → low) 

These extend the existing FIFO vs. priority behavior tests and improve coverage. 

I noticed some duplication in the test setup. I can factor this into helper functions if preferred, but for now I kept the code explicit to make the behavior easier to follow during review. 

Please let me know if you would like me to refactor this.

In the meantime, I’m happy to either continue improving test coverage or start looking into related issues (for example, the broadcast behavior issue), depending on what you think would be most useful. 

Thanks, and I appreciate any feedback!

-- 
View it on GitLab: https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/1084#note_146981
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/bugs/attachments/20260325/bb7a70ab/attachment-0001.htm>