mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>
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 12:24:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1145377467.17085.133.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1145376876.5447.58.camel@localhost.localdomain>

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 09:14 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:

> 
> > 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 ..
> 

We'll read/write doesn't work well with PI (or latencies for that
matter).  But rw_locks have one advantage over normal rt_mutex, and that
is they are self recursive.  i.e. one rw_lock can be taken over and over
again (as read) by the same process, as long as it releases it the same
amount of times.

-- Steve



  reply	other threads:[~2006-04-18 16:24 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
2006-04-18 16:24                   ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
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=1145377467.17085.133.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --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®