forked from Imagelibrary/rtems
epiphany: Delete CPU_UNROLL_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY
This commit is contained in:
@@ -69,27 +69,6 @@ extern "C" {
|
||||
|
||||
#define CPU_INLINE_ENABLE_DISPATCH FALSE
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Should the body of the search loops in _Thread_queue_Enqueue_priority
|
||||
* be unrolled one time? In unrolled each iteration of the loop examines
|
||||
* two "nodes" on the chain being searched. Otherwise, only one node
|
||||
* is examined per iteration.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* If TRUE, then the loops are unrolled.
|
||||
* If FALSE, then the loops are not unrolled.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The primary factor in making this decision is the cost of disabling
|
||||
* and enabling interrupts (_ISR_Flash) versus the cost of rest of the
|
||||
* body of the loop. On some CPUs, the flash is more expensive than
|
||||
* one iteration of the loop body. In this case, it might be desirable
|
||||
* to unroll the loop. It is important to note that on some CPUs, this
|
||||
* code is the longest interrupt disable period in RTEMS. So it is
|
||||
* necessary to strike a balance when setting this parameter.
|
||||
*
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
#define CPU_UNROLL_ENQUEUE_PRIORITY TRUE
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Does RTEMS manage a dedicated interrupt stack in software?
|
||||
*
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user