[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0901081440410.24688@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:45:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Peter Morreale <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
Sven Dietrich <SDietrich@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v7][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning
On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 13:14 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > If it was the current process that preempted the owner and these are RT
> > tasks pinned to the same CPU and the owner is of lower priority than the
> > spinner, we have a deadlock!
> >
> > Hmm, I do not think the need_sched here will even fix that :-/
>
> RT tasks could go directly to sleeping. The spinner would see them on
> the list and break out.
True, we could do:
if (owner) {
if (!spin_on_owner(lock, owner))
break;
} else if (rt_task(current))
break;
That would at least solve the issue in the short term.
-- Steve
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists