From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RT] bad BUG_ON in rtmutex.c
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 09:14:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1145376876.5447.58.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0604181058430.12720@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 11:06 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:32 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Actually, where that BUG_ON was is the exiting of the chain walk. So it
> > > does stop. It's the higher priority task that needs to be continuing
> > > the chain walk for that problem to occur. So really, it already does
> > > what you suggest :)
> >
> > I bet you could test for that condition in some other spots too . Like
> > when it adds to the pi_waiters , you could test if the priorities are
> > out of sync ..
>
> You mean the other places in rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain? It already
> checks once an iteration, anything more is just over kill.
Yeah, sounds good .
> Actually, I always thought that running PREEMPT_DESKTOP with soft and hard
> IRQS as threads was priority ceiling. It's just that all locks have the
> priority of MAX_RT_PRIO (no preemption allowed). OK, this doesn't apply
> to mutexes, but it does apply for spin_locks. :)
Interesting way to look at it .
Reminds me of the RT read/write locks, only one read or one writer at a
time, so it's really just a mutex ..
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-18 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-04-18 1:48 [RT] bad BUG_ON in rtmutex.c Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 12:20 ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 12:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 13:11 ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 13:50 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 13:55 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 14:09 ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 14:51 ` Daniel Walker
2006-04-18 13:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-04-18 15:06 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 16:14 ` Daniel Walker [this message]
2006-04-18 16:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 14:13 ` [PATCH -rt] Remove false BUG_ON from rtmutex.c Steven Rostedt
2006-04-18 13:12 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1145376876.5447.58.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.