lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Real-Time Preemption and UML?

* Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk> wrote:

> Well, I keep trying a little bit more. In the mean while you can get
> some of the stuff I needed to change to at least get it to compile:
>
> One of the problems was use of direct architecture specific semaphores
> (which doesn't work under PREEMPT_REALTIME) and in places where a
> quick (maybe too quick) look at the code told me that completions
> ought to be used. Therefore I changed two semaphores to completions
> which compiled fine. I have tried the change on 2.6.11-rc2, and it
> seemed to work, but I have not tested it heavily.

Jeff, any objections against adding this change to UML at some point?
It's at most a cleanup for now (PREEMPT_RT not being an upstream
feature), but it makes life easier if 'more exotic' semaphore details
are not being relied on (even if that reliance is 100% correct
currently).

Ingo
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.106 / U:0.572 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site