![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
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 01:43 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||