lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
On Fri, Dec 16, 2005 at 11:34:03PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I really can't think of any blocking kernel lock where priority
> inheritance would make _any_ sense at all. Please give me an example.

I have a better example of something we currently get wrong that I
haven't heard any RT person worry about yet. If two tasks are sleeping
on the same semaphore, the one to be woken up will be the first one to
wait for it, not the highest-priority task.

Obviously, this was introduced by the wake-one semantics. But how to
fix it? Should we scan the entire queue looking for the best task to
wake? Should we try to maintain the wait list in priority order? Or
should we just not care? Should we document that we don't care? ;-)
-
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: 2005-12-18 00:46    [W:0.316 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site