Use wpi::mutex instead of std::mutex. (#730)

This uses a priority-aware mutex on Linux platforms.

Fixes #729.
This commit is contained in:
Peter Johnson
2017-11-13 09:51:48 -08:00
committed by GitHub
parent 35d68d2a34
commit 4d559f3856
86 changed files with 491 additions and 839 deletions

View File

@@ -7,15 +7,15 @@
#include <atomic>
#include <chrono>
#include <condition_variable>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <cstring>
#include <limits>
#include <mutex>
#include <FRC_NetworkCommunication/FRCComm.h>
#include <FRC_NetworkCommunication/NetCommRPCProxy_Occur.h>
#include <llvm/raw_ostream.h>
#include <support/condition_variable.h>
#include <support/mutex.h>
#include "HAL/DriverStation.h"
@@ -27,9 +27,9 @@ struct HAL_JoystickAxesInt {
int16_t axes[HAL_kMaxJoystickAxes];
};
static std::mutex msgMutex;
static std::condition_variable newDSDataAvailableCond;
static std::mutex newDSDataAvailableMutex;
static wpi::mutex msgMutex;
static wpi::condition_variable newDSDataAvailableCond;
static wpi::mutex newDSDataAvailableMutex;
static int newDSDataAvailableCounter{0};
extern "C" {
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ int32_t HAL_SendError(HAL_Bool isError, int32_t errorCode, HAL_Bool isLVCode,
// Avoid flooding console by keeping track of previous 5 error
// messages and only printing again if they're longer than 1 second old.
static constexpr int KEEP_MSGS = 5;
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(msgMutex);
std::lock_guard<wpi::mutex> lock(msgMutex);
static std::string prevMsg[KEEP_MSGS];
static std::chrono::time_point<std::chrono::steady_clock>
prevMsgTime[KEEP_MSGS];
@@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ bool HAL_IsNewControlData(void) {
thread_local int lastCount{-1};
int currentCount = 0;
{
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lock(newDSDataAvailableMutex);
std::unique_lock<wpi::mutex> lock(newDSDataAvailableMutex);
currentCount = newDSDataAvailableCounter;
}
if (lastCount == currentCount) return false;
@@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ HAL_Bool HAL_WaitForDSDataTimeout(double timeout) {
auto timeoutTime =
std::chrono::steady_clock::now() + std::chrono::duration<double>(timeout);
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lock(newDSDataAvailableMutex);
std::unique_lock<wpi::mutex> lock(newDSDataAvailableMutex);
int currentCount = newDSDataAvailableCounter;
while (newDSDataAvailableCounter == currentCount) {
if (timeout > 0) {
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ static void newDataOccur(uint32_t refNum) {
// Since we could get other values, require our specific handle
// to signal our threads
if (refNum != refNumber) return;
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(newDSDataAvailableMutex);
std::lock_guard<wpi::mutex> lock(newDSDataAvailableMutex);
// Nofify all threads
newDSDataAvailableCounter++;
newDSDataAvailableCond.notify_all();
@@ -372,11 +372,11 @@ static void newDataOccur(uint32_t refNum) {
*/
void HAL_InitializeDriverStation(void) {
static std::atomic_bool initialized{false};
static std::mutex initializeMutex;
static wpi::mutex initializeMutex;
// Initial check, as if it's true initialization has finished
if (initialized) return;
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lock(initializeMutex);
std::lock_guard<wpi::mutex> lock(initializeMutex);
// Second check in case another thread was waiting
if (initialized) return;