From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261550AbVFEKxS (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jun 2005 06:53:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261551AbVFEKxS (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jun 2005 06:53:18 -0400 Received: from 213-239-205-147.clients.your-server.de ([213.239.205.147]:50562 "EHLO mail.tglx.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261550AbVFEKxO (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Jun 2005 06:53:14 -0400 Subject: Re: patch] Real-Time Preemption, plist fixes From: Thomas Gleixner Reply-To: tglx@linutronix.de To: Daniel Walker Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Inaky Perez-Gonzalez , Ingo Molnar , Oleg Nesterov In-Reply-To: <1117960337.20785.251.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> References: <1117960337.20785.251.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: linutronix Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 12:53:48 +0200 Message-Id: <1117968828.20785.286.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2005-06-05 at 10:32 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 2005-06-04 at 17:53 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > > I already released a patch to fix this. > > Nice to know. Where ? > Ingo pointed me at the patch. Sorry, but I really don't see the release there. > The first time I saw these latencies I has the PI abstraction applied, and > the most recent time I had the attached patch applied only. This patch is > small so I'm not sure if it could have that type of effect on task > latency. It fixes a problem and uncovers others, but your comment is more a question than an explanation for the urgency of the fix. In fact the original implementation leads to solid deadlocks in plist_for_each_safe() loops. I really can't blame Ingo for ignoring this. tglx