You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently the pre_post_proc struct gets configured on gmw_start and is constant throughout the whole protocol execution.
This means that at the end of each Baloo round we are forced to poll to execute the post_process_current_round and the post_process_current_round should they be defined.
/* poll the post process */
if(pre_post_proc.post_process_current_round) {
process_poll(pre_post_proc.post_process_current_round);
}
/* wake-up earlier to execute the pre-process (if one is defined) */
pre_process_offset = (!pre_post_proc.pre_process_next_round) ? 0 :
GMW_MS_TO_TICKS(GMW_CONF_T_PREPROCESS);
I was wondering if an extension to this is either planned by you guys, or a modification by PR is welcome.
The idea would be to either
Add a configurable flag section to the struct gmw_pre_post_processes which can allow to toggle the pre and post polls on or off.
Allow full configuration of the struct gmw_pre_post_processes, exposing methods to change its contents after the initial gmw_start call. This would allow to set the post_process_current_round field to NULL temporarily should be wish to not preempt.
Is it reasonable? The idea that certain protocols might wish to have back-to-back floods without being forced to preempt the app process before they are finished.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Allow full configuration of the struct gmw_pre_post_processes, exposing methods to change its contents after the initial gmw_start call. This would allow to set the post_process_current_round field to NULL temporarily should be wish to not preempt.
Currently the
pre_post_proc
struct gets configured ongmw_start
and is constant throughout the whole protocol execution.This means that at the end of each Baloo round we are forced to poll to execute the
post_process_current_round
and thepost_process_current_round
should they be defined.I was wondering if an extension to this is either planned by you guys, or a modification by PR is welcome.
The idea would be to either
struct gmw_pre_post_processes
which can allow to toggle the pre and post polls on or off.struct gmw_pre_post_processes
, exposing methods to change its contents after the initialgmw_start
call. This would allow to set thepost_process_current_round
field toNULL
temporarily should be wish to not preempt.Is it reasonable? The idea that certain protocols might wish to have back-to-back floods without being forced to preempt the app process before they are finished.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: