From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7d2a1bc8d768974f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: "Alex R. Mosteo" <devnull@mailinator.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Gnat and priority level
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:18:18 +0200
Message-ID: <4174F7FA.1020705@mailinator.com>
References: <1098176457.332197.157030@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
   <4174E52A.60405@mailinator.com>
 <1098181273.072027.260280@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de NjJwC3CadMbW7QsTJCULXguFKq3+ll5UBk0lGaHlsIBrNcD/4=
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040913)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
In-Reply-To: <1098181273.072027.260280@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:5444
Date: 2004-10-19T13:18:18+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

mferracini wrote:
>>You can't (at least easily). Not only the gnat implementation uses
> 
> just
> 
>>32 priorities, but these are mapped to underlying windows priorities,
>>which are only 7, if I remember correctly (yes, there's overlapping).
> 
> 
> and with Linux rt version like RT-Linux there are the some problem?
> thanks again.

Take the following with a grain of salt, since I'm much less experienced 
with gnat for linux.

Firstly, I think that gnat doesn't target the RT capabilities of 
RT-Linux, so you'll really have regular non-RT linux threads. Unless 
someone has a patch for it.

Second, you can choose two threading implementations with gnat for linux:

* linux native threads, whose particularities I don't know but some 
linux expert could tell you (BTW, using the old 2.4 thread 
implementation, not the new 2.6 one).

* fsu-threads (I think) which if I remember correctly are 
POSIX-compliant or something-else-compliant which native linux's aren't. 
Those have the particularity that you have a single linux process, so a 
blocking call in any fsu-thread will block all the others (i.e. the 
linux thread is blocked).

Someone more experienced can confirm these things? I'm interested in the 
details too.