On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Iain Duncan <iainduncanlists@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Paul Davis <paul@email-addr-hidden>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Emanuel Rumpf <xbran@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>>
>> > While this is restrictive, in the way you mention, I think it's a
>> > welcome simplification
>> > ( compared to implementing a real-time-capable-linked-list + other
>> > rt-structures ),
>> > if your use-case doesn't require direct calls to the list (for any
>> > reason),
>> > then you could request insert/remove/update operations through the
>> > rt-ring-buffer.
>>
>> you can't perform insert/remove/update operations on a "normal" linked
>> list in an RT thread.
>
> Sorry, what do you need instead? ( trying hard to absorb all this.. )
either
(1) a lock free data structure
(2) perform the modifications on a copy in a non-RT context and
then make the result
available to the RT context (i.e. RCU)
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Fri Nov 4 20:15:02 2011
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Nov 04 2011 - 20:15:02 EET