lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 1/3] rtmutex: update rt-mutex-design
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:12:53PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex-design.txt b/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex-design.txt
> index 8666070..11beb55 100644
> --- a/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex-design.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/locking/rt-mutex-design.txt
> @@ -97,9 +97,9 @@ waiter - A waiter is a struct that is stored on the stack of a blocked
> a process being blocked on the mutex, it is fine to allocate
> the waiter on the process's stack (local variable). This
> structure holds a pointer to the task, as well as the mutex that
> - the task is blocked on. It also has the plist node structures to
> - place the task in the waiter_list of a mutex as well as the
> - pi_list of a mutex owner task (described below).
> + the task is blocked on. It also has a rbtree node structures to
> + place the task in waiters rbtree of a mutex as well as the
> + pi_waiters rbtree of a mutex owner task (described below).

whitespace fail

>
> waiter is sometimes used in reference to the task that is waiting
> on a mutex. This is the same as waiter->task.
> @@ -179,53 +179,35 @@ again.
> |
> F->L5-+
>
> +If the G process has highest priority in the chain, then all the tasks up
> +the chain (A and B in this example), must have their priorities increased
> +to that of G.

No, only the top task that's actually runnable needs to be modified. The
rest we don't care about because they're blocked.

> +Since the pi_waiters of a task holds an order by priority of all the top waiters
> +of all the mutexes that the task owns, rt_mutex_getprio simply needs to compare
> +the top pi waiter to its own normal priority, and return the higher priority
> +back.

rt_mutex_getprio() doesn't exist.

> +The main operation of this function is summarized by Thomas Gleixner in
> +rtmutex.c. See the 'Chain walk basics and protection scope' comment for further
> +details.

Since all the useful bits are there anyway, why keep this document
around at all?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-21 19:02    [W:0.055 / U:4.348 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site