[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Yeah, I will try to construct a new test.
2016-06-22 15:28 GMT-07:00 Christos Zoulas <christos%zoulas.com@localhost>:
> On Jun 22, 3:11pm, charles.cui1984%gmail.com@localhost (Charles Cui) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: _SC_SIGQUEUE_MAX
> | Thanks Christos for these comments!
> | In terms of the new fields exposed by sched_param, those are only for
> | testing convenience, if we decide to expose those to users, we need to
> | consider carefully.
> Does not matter, if we expose them or not. If the structure size changes,
> it breaks the ABI... We just need to decide what to do. I don't think it
> is that useful to expose them... Anyway if we change it we should decide
> if we want to include the sporadic scheduler stuff so we don't have to
> keep burning syscalls (or version the structure).
> | In terms of the testing method proposed by you, did you already implement
> | and test
> | or want me to provide the test?
> Why don't you give it a try...
Main Index |
Thread Index |