![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Therefor, if you want to handle that "init protection" scenario, do not > use a mutex, because the owner can not be defined at compile - > allocation time. Sure it could. We certainly have "init_task", for example. It may or may not be the right thing to use, of course. Depends on what the situation is. > You can still implement (chose a mechanism) a mutex on top - or in case > of lack of priority inheritance or debugging with exactly the same - > mechanism as a semaphore, but this does not change the semantical > difference at all. "Friends don't let friends use priority inheritance". Just don't do it. If you really need it, your system is broken anyway. Linus - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-12-16 23:44 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||