Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
From: Bill Huey (hui) <hidden>
Date: 2005-12-22 12:48:29
Also in:
lkml
From: Bill Huey (hui) <hidden>
Date: 2005-12-22 12:48:29
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 04:40:27AM -0800, Bill Huey wrote:
The current kernel mostly using traditional spinlocks doesn't have locking complicated enough to warrant it. However, the -rt patch does create[s] a circumstance where a fully preemptible [kernel] may sleep task with mutexes held create[ing] [-and needs] [a need to] resolve priority inversions that results from it. That's of
With corrections... Sorry, I meant a fully preemptive kernel has priority inversion as an inheritant property and needs to resolved using some kind of priority inheritance.
course assuming that priority is something that needs to be strictly obeyed in this variant of the kernel with consideration to priority inheritance.
bill