From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758583Ab2CHUBx (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:01:53 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:9267 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758367Ab2CHUBm (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:01:42 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=Wf+OmjdX c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=XQbtiDEiEegA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=qL2bEeoSVyO6-YR97C0A:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1331236900.25686.462.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.2.9-rt17 From: Steven Rostedt To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Thomas Gleixner , LKML , linux-rt-users Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:01:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1331236139.11248.407.camel@twins> References: <1331230991.25686.452.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <1331231287.11248.396.camel@twins> <1331232159.25686.456.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <1331236139.11248.407.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 20:48 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 13:42 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > cpu_chill_on_lock(). > > I think what you were hinting at is: > > spin_lock(&lock); > spin_unlock(&lock); Exactly. > > which is the rt_mutex implementation of spin_unlock_wait(). No new > function needed for that. Yes but... > > Trouble is that you cannot use inode->i_lock as explained.. Right! What I was hinting at was that the spin_lock() can boost, but it could also fail if there was a deadlock detected, and it wouldn't cause the system to hang. -- Steve