Re: Robust futexes

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>]

On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 15:57 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Hi Ingo, all,
> 
> 	Noticed (via LWN, hence the delay) your robust futex work.  Have you
> considered the less-perfect, but simpler option of simply having futex
> calls which tell the kernel that the u32 value is in fact the holder's
> TID?
> 
> 	In this case, you don't get perfect robustness when TID wrap occurs:
> the kernel won't know that the lock holder is dead.  However, it's
> simple, and telling the kernel that the lock is the tid allows the
> kernel to do prio inheritence etc. in future.

	I think this was Todd Kneisel's approach . His version was vma
scanning, which is what Ingo is trying to replace. It just used the
current u32 value .

Daniel