Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: lock order in O(1) scheduler | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 10 Jan 2002 00:49:24 -0500 |
| |
On Thu, 2002-01-10 at 00:29, David S. Miller wrote:
> Unlocking order doesn't matter wrt. ABBA deadlock.
Indeed. Thank you.
Anyhow, Ingo, here is a patch for the typo in set_cpus_allowed:
diff -urN linux-2.5.2-pre10/ linux/ --- linux-2.5.2-pre10/kernel/sched.c Tue Jan 8 00:26:17 2002 +++ linux/kernel/sched.c Thu Jan 10 00:41:38 2002 @@ -813,8 +813,8 @@ spin_lock_irq(&target_rq->lock); spin_lock(&this_rq->lock); } else { - spin_lock_irq(&target_rq->lock); - spin_lock(&this_rq->lock); + spin_lock_irq(&this_rq->lock); + spin_lock(&target_rq->lock); } dequeue_task(p, p->array); this_rq->nr_running--; Robert Love
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |