lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: lock order in O(1) scheduler
From
Date
On Thu, 2002-01-10 at 00:29, David S. Miller wrote:

> Unlocking order doesn't matter wrt. ABBA deadlock.

Indeed. Thank you.

Anyhow, Ingo, here is a patch for the typo in set_cpus_allowed:

diff -urN linux-2.5.2-pre10/ linux/
--- linux-2.5.2-pre10/kernel/sched.c Tue Jan 8 00:26:17 2002
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c Thu Jan 10 00:41:38 2002
@@ -813,8 +813,8 @@
spin_lock_irq(&target_rq->lock);
spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
} else {
- spin_lock_irq(&target_rq->lock);
- spin_lock(&this_rq->lock);
+ spin_lock_irq(&this_rq->lock);
+ spin_lock(&target_rq->lock);
}
dequeue_task(p, p->array);
this_rq->nr_running--;
Robert Love

-
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: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.070 / U:0.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site