[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160420131932.GC3430@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:19:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] sched/rtmutex/deadline: Fix a PI crash for
deadline tasks
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 07:37:03PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> + /* Updated under pi_lock and rtmutex lock */
> struct rb_node *pi_waiters_leftmost;
> + struct rb_node *pi_waiters_leftmost_copy;
> struct task_struct *rt_mutex_get_top_task(struct task_struct *task)
> {
> + if (!task->pi_waiters_leftmost_copy)
> return NULL;
>
> + return rb_entry(task->pi_waiters_leftmost_copy,
> + struct rt_mutex_waiter, pi_tree_entry)->task;
> }
why ?! Why not keep a regular task_struct pointer and avoid this stuff?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists