From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751913AbWFLMXg (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:23:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751914AbWFLMXg (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:23:36 -0400 Received: from vbn.0050556.lodgenet.net ([216.142.194.234]:21930 "EHLO vbn.0050556.lodgenet.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751910AbWFLMXf (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 08:23:35 -0400 Subject: Re: NPTL mutex and the scheduling priority From: Arjan van de Ven To: Atsushi Nemoto Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20060612.171035.108739746.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp> References: <20060612.171035.108739746.nemoto@toshiba-tops.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:23:28 +0200 Message-Id: <1150115008.3131.106.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2006-06-12 at 17:10 +0900, Atsushi Nemoto wrote: > # This is a copy of message posted libc-alpha ML. I want to hear from > # kernel people too ... > > Hi. I found that it seems NPTL's mutex does not follow the scheduling > parameter. If some threads were blocked by getting a single > mutex_lock, I expect that a thread with highest priority got the lock > first, but current NPTL's behaviour is different. \ you want to use the PI futexes that are in 2.6.17-rc5-mm tree