change log for rtems (2011-04-15)

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at
Fri Apr 15 14:08:39 UTC 2011

On 04/15/2011 08:22 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> On 04/15/2011 03:19 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> On 04/15/2011 07:51 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> On 04/15/2011 02:43 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>>> The change to the test code is wrong. All rtems_ methods in it return
>>>> rtems_status_code not int. If there is a mix or return types use two
>>>> variables.
>>> Do you refer to psxstat?  In test.c the status variable must be of
>>> type int.
>>> The return value of the rtems_* methods is ignored (it was an assignment
>>> without effect).
>> I was reviewing on my phone so it was a bit difficult.
>> The code I was referring to had taken the status =
>> off of rtems_ calls.
> Yes, that were the assignments without effect.  Should I add an
> rtems_test_assert( status == RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL )
> ?
That would be preferred.  I was going to email and suggest that.

In tests, the status should always be checked.

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research&  Development
joel.sherrill at        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
    Support Available             (256) 722-9985

More information about the vc mailing list