Re: candidate sched.h and sys/sched.h for review

[Ralf Corsepius <ralf dot corsepius at rtems dot org>]

On 03/31/2010 06:39 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 03/31/2010 11:31 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 03/31/2010 06:22 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > > On 03/31/2010 10:08 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > On 03/31/2010 04:54 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > > > > Next try.  I am starting a build with this now so there
> > > > > might be problems.
> > > > >
> > > > > Corinna.. SCHED_SPORADIC is now 4. My concern is
> > > > > with these constants is that they are sometimes used
> > > > > in language bindings and we would have to propagate that.
> > > > > If you don't mind, once this rework is in, I will address
> > > > > getting us in sync on the other values.
> > > > >
> > > > > How does it look now?
> > > > Errm, I don't think so:
> > > >
> > > > * Shouldn't sched.h include sys/sched.h?
> > > > * Why does sys/sched.h exist at all?
> > > >      Shouldn't it better be merged into sched.h?
> > > newlib is rather contorted here but I think it
> > > gets the job done.
> > >
> > > sched.h includes sys/types.h (which defines timespec)
> > SUSv4 mandates timespec in<time.h>  and sys/sched.h to receive it from
> > <time.h>.
> Do you mean sched.h?
Yes, sorry.

Ralf