Messages in this thread | | | From | "Sven Dietrich" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] Abstracted Priority Inheritance for RT | Date | Thu, 2 Jun 2005 18:10:18 -0700 |
| |
> > 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/
| |