[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1504072102510.3845@nanos>
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 21:17:18 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke <tmac@...com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] rtmutex Real-Time Linux: Fixing kernel BUG at
kernel/locking/rtmutex.c:997!
On Tue, 7 Apr 2015, Jason Low wrote:
> The lock shouldn't be used in get_next_timer_interrupt() either right?
>
> unsigned long get_next_timer_interrupt(unsigned long now)
> {
> ...
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT_FULL
> /*
> * On PREEMPT_RT we cannot sleep here. If the trylock does not
> * succeed then we return the worst-case 'expires in 1 tick'
> * value. We use the rt functions here directly to avoid a
> * migrate_disable() call.
> */
> if (!spin_do_trylock(&base->lock))
> return now + 1;
> #else
And how do you protect the walk of the timer wheel against a
concurrent insertion/removal?
Thanks,
tglx
--
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