[PATCH 09/12] fsdosfssync01: Stack size for bdbuf SMP workaround

[Ralf Kirchner]

Am 28.05.2014 09:56, schrieb Chris Johns:
> On 28/05/2014 4:47 pm, Ralf Kirchner wrote:
>> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
>> Betreff: Re: [PATCH 09/12] fsdosfssync01: Stack size for bdbuf SMP
>> workaround
>> Datum: Tue, 27 May 2014 17:11:32 +0200
>> Von: Ralf Kirchner <ralf.kirchner at embedded-brains.de>
>> Organisation: embedded-brains GmbH
>> An: Gedare Bloom <gedare at rtems.org>
>>
>> Am 27.05.2014 17:04, schrieb Gedare Bloom:
>>> On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Ralf Kirchner
>>> <ralf.kirchner at embedded-brains.de> wrote:
>>>> Increase the size of the init task stack for the SMP workaround
>>>> within bdbuf.
>>>> ---
>>>>   testsuites/fstests/fsdosfssync01/init.c |   12 ++++++++++++
>>>>   1 Datei geändert, 12 Zeilen hinzugefügt(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/testsuites/fstests/fsdosfssync01/init.c
>>>> b/testsuites/fstests/fsdosfssync01/init.c
>>>> index b0022e9..022cd2b 100644
>>>> --- a/testsuites/fstests/fsdosfssync01/init.c
>>>> +++ b/testsuites/fstests/fsdosfssync01/init.c
>>>> @@ -170,6 +170,18 @@ size_t rtems_ramdisk_configuration_size = 1;
>>>>
>>>>   #define CONFIGURE_EXTRA_TASK_STACKS (8 * 1024)
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +#if defined( RTEMS_SMP )
>>>> +  #if defined( RTEMS_POSIX_API )
>>>> +    /* The single core bdbuf implementation with enabling and
>>>> disabling preemption
>>>> +     * will not work under SMP. Thus we need to use POSIX mutexes
>>>> and POSIX
>>>> +     * condition variables as a workaround.
>>>> +     * These require additional stack size.
>>>> +     */
>>>> +    #define CONFIGURE_INIT_TASK_STACK_SIZE (2 *
>>>> CPU_STACK_MINIMUM_SIZE)
>>>> +  #endif /* defined( RTEMS_POSIX_API ) */
>>>> +#endif /* defined( RTEMS_SMP ) */
>>>> +
>>> This kind of hack in the application configuration is not very
>>> user-friendly. You should adjust for the required resources in
>>> confdefs.h instead, by configuring for the required mutexes/condvars
>>> explicitly.
>> Hi Gedare,
>> That is beeing done. Memory for the mutexes and condition variables gets
>> allocated in confdefs.h.
>> Here I need more stack (likely because the nesting depth is higher for
>> mutexes and condition variables than for the single core handling with
>> semaphores).
>> And I need this addition stack only for this single test. All other
>> tests still had sufficient spare stack.
> 
> How many bsps and different architectures were tested ?
> 
> Chris
The sis BSP with optimization off.
Do you have any recommendations for BSP setups which are more stack hungry?


-- 
--------------------------------------------
Embedded Brains GmbH
Ralf Kirchner          Dornierstr. 4
D-82178 Puchheim       Germany
email: ralf.kirchner at embedded-brains.de
Phone: +49(0)89/1894741-17
Fax:   +49(0)89/1894741-08

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.