forked from Imagelibrary/rtems
added comments to to document the definition of posix priority
and how it corresponds to rtems core priority.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -5,6 +5,14 @@
|
||||
#ifndef __RTEMS_POSIX_PRIORITY_inl
|
||||
#define __RTEMS_POSIX_PRIORITY_inl
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* 1003.1b-1993,2.2.2.80 definition of priority, p. 19
|
||||
*
|
||||
* "Numericallly higher values represent higher priorities."
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Thus, RTEMS Core has priorities run in the opposite sense of the POSIX API.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
STATIC INLINE boolean _POSIX_Priority_Is_valid(
|
||||
int priority
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -5,6 +5,14 @@
|
||||
#ifndef __RTEMS_POSIX_PRIORITY_inl
|
||||
#define __RTEMS_POSIX_PRIORITY_inl
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* 1003.1b-1993,2.2.2.80 definition of priority, p. 19
|
||||
*
|
||||
* "Numericallly higher values represent higher priorities."
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Thus, RTEMS Core has priorities run in the opposite sense of the POSIX API.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
STATIC INLINE boolean _POSIX_Priority_Is_valid(
|
||||
int priority
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -5,6 +5,14 @@
|
||||
#ifndef __RTEMS_POSIX_PRIORITY_inl
|
||||
#define __RTEMS_POSIX_PRIORITY_inl
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* 1003.1b-1993,2.2.2.80 definition of priority, p. 19
|
||||
*
|
||||
* "Numericallly higher values represent higher priorities."
|
||||
*
|
||||
* Thus, RTEMS Core has priorities run in the opposite sense of the POSIX API.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
STATIC INLINE boolean _POSIX_Priority_Is_valid(
|
||||
int priority
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user