lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Robust futexes
From
Date
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 08:23 -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> telling the kernel that the lock is the tid allows the
> > kernel to do prio inheritence etc. in future.
>
> Priority Inheritance has come up a couple of times in relation to Ingo's new
> LightWeight Robust Futexes. Ingo has said that PI is orthogonal to LWRF, but I
> don't think we've heard if there are plans already in the works (or in his head
> :-) for PI. Rusty's comment above reads as "the current LWRF implementation
> cannot support PI" - is there something about it that makes PI impractical to
> implement?

Hi Darren!

Ingo's approach is indeed orthogonal. But the obvious approach to PI
etc is to tell the kernel who is holding the lock, by making the lock
value == TID of the holder. If we are heading towards this anyway, the
kernel could use this to implement robust mutexes, too, although not
with a 100% guarantee (due to tid wrap). Ingo doesn't like that,
though.

Hope that clarifies!
Rusty.
--
ccontrol: http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/ccontrol

-
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: 2006-03-10 02:43    [W:0.085 / U:0.824 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site