lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PI patch against 2.6.16-rt9

* Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk> wrote:

> > in short: wow do you ensure that the boosting is still part of the same
> > dependency chain where it started off?
>
> I don't insure that. But does it matter?!?

yes.

> If the task is still blocked on a lock and the owner of that lock
> might need boosting. The boosting operation itself will always be
> _correct_ as the pi_lock is held when it is done. But the task doing
> the boosting might have preempted for so long that there is nothing
> left to do - and then it simply stops unless deadlock detection is on.

well, another possibility is that the task got blocked again, and we'll
continue boosting _the wrong chain_. I.e. we'll add extra priority to
task(s) that might not deserve it at all (it doesnt own the lock we are
interested in anymore).

i.e. we must observe the boosting chain in a time-coherent form. We must
observe an actual "frozen" (all locks held) state of the system that we
_know_ forms a correct dependency chain at that moment, to be able to
propagate the priority one step forward. The act of 'boosting' must be
atomic.

Ingo
-
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: 2006-03-28 23:29    [W:0.049 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site