lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH] Abstracted Priority Inheritance for RT
Date

>
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 01:43:54AM -0400, john cooper wrote:
> > That might have been me. The last time I looked at this
> specifically,
> > full transitive promotion was being done in the RT patch. However
> > unlike your attempt at scaling the lock scope, the RT patch had one
> > lock which coordinated all mutex dependency traversals
> system wide.
> > This lock must be speculatively acquired even before we ascertain
> > transitive promotion is required.
> >
> > So it doesn't scale as well as it could in the case of
> > large count SMP systems. The response was that of "get
> > it to work first and then we'll get it to scale" which
> > is reasonable.
>
> Just curious, what do you thinks about the rw-lock comments
> from Esben in that a real rw-lock can't be deterministic ?
>

I think it can be deterministic if the number of readers is limited (to 1)

-
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: 2005-06-03 03:14    [W:0.040 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site