mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RT] bad BUG_ON in rtmutex.c
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:14:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1145376876.5447.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0604181058430.12720@gandalf.stny.rr.com>

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 11:06 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Daniel Walker wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:32 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Actually, where that BUG_ON was is the exiting of the chain walk. So it
> > > does stop.  It's the higher priority task that needs to be continuing
> > > the chain walk for that problem to occur.  So really, it already does
> > > what you suggest :)
> >
> > I bet you could test for that condition in some other spots too . Like
> > when it adds to the pi_waiters , you could test if the priorities are
> > out of sync ..
> 
> You mean the other places in rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain?  It already
> checks once an iteration, anything more is just over kill.

Yeah, sounds good .

> Actually, I always thought that running PREEMPT_DESKTOP with soft and hard
> IRQS as threads was priority ceiling.  It's just that all locks have the
> priority of MAX_RT_PRIO (no preemption allowed).  OK, this doesn't apply
> to mutexes, but it does apply for spin_locks. :)

Interesting way to look at it .

Reminds me of the RT read/write locks, only one read or one writer at a
time, so it's really just a mutex ..

Daniel 


  reply	other threads:[~2006-04-18 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-04-18  1:48 Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 12:20 ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 12:34   ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 13:11     ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 13:50       ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 13:55         ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 14:09         ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 14:32           ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 14:51             ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 13:52               ` Ingo Molnar
2006-04-18 15:06               ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 16:14                 ` Daniel Walker [this message]
2006-04-18 16:24                   ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 14:13 ` [PATCH -rt] Remove false BUG_ON from rtmutex.c Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 13:12   ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1145376876.5447.58.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=dwalker@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®