[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1506091451580.4133@nanos>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2015 14:53:36 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rfc 4/4] locking/rtmutex: Support spin on owner (osq)
On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 11:29:59AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > If you look at the RT code, then you'll notice that in the slow lock
> > path we queue the incoming waiter (including the PI dance) and then
> > spin only if the waiter is the top waiter on the lock.
>
> On a related note; does the RT code still add lock stealing to rtmutex?
No.
> We allow higher prio lock stealing, but I seem to remember a longish
> debate if we should allow equal prio lock stealing.
Right. We never finished that one:)
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