| Date | Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:49:39 -0700 | Subject | Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-rc4-mm1-U8 | From | Bill Huey (hui) <> |
| |
On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 01:38:21PM -0700, Bill Huey wrote: > On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 10:33:50PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > Linux semaphores (being counted) have always been a fine fit for things > > like the loop use, where you get to down it 10 times because you have 10 > > items pending. I know this isn't the traditional mutex and that it > > doesn't protect data as such, but is was never abuse. It isn't overload. > > Doing it with a traditional mutex (I'm assuming this is what mutex_t is > > in Ingos tree) would be overload and a bad idea, indeed. > > Well, this is something that's got to be considered by the larger Linux > community and whether these conventions are to be kept or removed. It's > a larger issue than what can be address in Ingo's preemption patch, but > with inevitable need for something like this in the kernel (hard RT) > it's really unavoidable collision. IMO, it's got to go, which is a nasty > change.
But this is a non-fatal case. I'll see if I can change this logic to not completely die when this case is detected.
bill
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|