stacking of rtems_clock_tick?

[Aaron J. Grier]

On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 09:19:09AM -0500, Joel Sherrill wrote:

> "Aaron J. Grier" wrote:
> > 
> > sp tests 11, 14, 22, and 24 are all bombing out with
> > 
> > _Thread_Dispatch_disable_level is (0) not 1
> > 
> > any ideas?
> 
> Which version of RTEMS are you using?

4.5.0-beta3a.

> This integrity check was fairly recently added and some tests tried to
> print from context switch user extensions which ended up violating
> this.
>
> Where is the failure?  

c/src/tests/sptests/sp11/timer.c line #95, in TA2_send_10_to_self()

c/src/tests/sptests/sp14/task1.c line #31, in Signal_3_to_task_1()

c/src/tests/sptests/sp22/delay.c line #30, in Delayed_resume()

c/src/tests/sptests/sp24/resume.c line #32, in Resume_task()

all failures are generated from the directive_failed_with_level macro,
and all above functions are being called from _Watchdog_Tickle.

shouldn't _Thread_Dispatch_disable_level be 0 if you're being called
from a watchdog, since _Watchdog_Tickle_Ticks is separate from
_Thread_Dispatch?

-- 
  Aaron J. Grier   |    Frye Electronics, Tigard, OR   |   aaron at frye.com
   "Cthulhu for President. Why settle for a lesser evil?" -- Matt Minnis