lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: pthread_mutex_unlock (was Re: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow)
From
Date
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 13:02 +0900, Samuel Masham wrote:
> On 26/01/06, Samuel Masham <samuel.masham@gmail.com> wrote:
> > comment:
> > As a rt person I don't like the idea of scheduler bounce so the way
> > round seems to be have the mutex lock acquiring work on a FIFO like
> > basis.
>
> which is obviously wrong...
>
> Howeve my basic point stands but needs to be clarified a bit:
>
> I think I can print non-compliant if the mutex acquisition doesn't
> respect the higher priority of the waiter over the current process
> even if the mutex is "available".
>
> OK?

I don't think using an optional feature (PI) counts...

Lee

-
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: 2006-01-26 05:57    [W:0.112 / U:0.144 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site