linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to workqueue infrastructure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1185981585.9513.119.camel@ghaskins-t60p.haskins.net>
Date:	Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:19:45 -0400
From:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To:	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Cc:	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RT: Add priority-queuing and priority-inheritance to
	workqueue infrastructure

On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 08:10 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:

> 
> rt_mutex_setprio() is just a function. It was also designed specifically
> for PI , so it seems fairly sane to use it in other PI type
> situations ..
> 

Yes.  It is designed for PI and I wasn't suggesting you shouldn't use
the logic itself.  What I was suggesting is that dealing with an API
that has "rt_mutex" in it for something that has nothing to do with
rt_mutexes is, well...

All I was suggesting is that we break out the PI subsystem from rt_mutex
code so its an independent PI API and have the rt_mutex subsystem become
a user.   That's a far cleaner way to do it, IMHO.

-Greg

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/