[lkml]   [2000]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch]2.4.0-test6 "spinlock" preemption patch
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 11:37:46AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:

> That code example can in theory deadlock without any patches if the CPU's
> end up locked in sync with each other and the same one always wins the test.
> It isnt likely on current x86 but other processors are a different story

If seen systems (not processors!) that can detect such a case let one
process randomly win over the others.


"Embrace, Enhance, Eliminate" - it worked for the pope, it'll work for Bill.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:38    [W:0.052 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site