From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com, patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 7/7] rcu: Quiet RCU-lockdep warnings involving interrupt disabling
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 11:56:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1323190602.30977.94.camel@frodo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111206160455.GC2325@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 08:04 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Perhaps the real answer is that we need to create an API for priority
> > inheritance, that things like RCU could use. Attach a task that another
> > task requires to finish something and boost the priority of that task.
> > Maybe even completions could use such a thing?
>
> I would be OK with that -- that was in fact the approach I was taking
> when I was advised to use mutexes instead. ;-)
Maybe we should rethink it. Using the makeshift mutex looks to be a
short term hack. But if we are starting to build on it, it will end up
being a horrible design, based off of a hack.
A mutex is to provide mutual exclusion. If we start bastardizing it to
do other things, it will become unmaintainable. I dare say that it's
close to unmaintainable now ;)
If we create a new API to handle inheritance, then perhaps it could be
used for other things like workqueues and completions (in -rt only).
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-06 16:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-03 18:34 [PATCH tip/core/rcu 0/7] Preview of fourth set of RCU changes for 3.3 Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 1/7] rcu: Don't check irq nesting from rcu idle entry/exit Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 2/7] rcu: Irq nesting is always 0 on rcu_enter_idle_common Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 3/7] rcu: Keep invoking callbacks if CPU otherwise idle Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 4/7] rcu: Adaptive dyntick-idle preparation Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 5/7] rcu: remove redundant rcu_cpu_stall_suppress declaration Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 6/7] driver-core/cpu: Add cpu_is_hotpluggable() for rcutorture error analysis Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 21:06 ` Josh Triplett
2011-12-03 23:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-03 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 7/7] rcu: Quiet RCU-lockdep warnings involving interrupt disabling Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-05 9:19 ` Yong Zhang
2011-12-05 16:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-06 1:26 ` Yong Zhang
2011-12-06 2:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-06 3:27 ` [PATCH 1/3] kernel.h: sched: introduce might_sleep_disabled() Yong Zhang
2011-12-06 3:28 ` [PATCH 2/3] rtmutex: introduce rt_mutex_lock_irqdisabled() Yong Zhang
2011-12-06 3:29 ` [PATCH 3/3] rcu: use rt_mutex_lock_irqdisabled() in rcu_boost() Yong Zhang
2011-12-06 9:52 ` [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu 7/7] rcu: Quiet RCU-lockdep warnings involving interrupt disabling Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-06 10:05 ` Yong Zhang
2011-12-06 10:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-06 12:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-12-06 16:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-06 16:33 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-06 16:56 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2011-12-06 17:16 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-06 10:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-06 16:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-06 16:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-06 16:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-12-05 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-12-05 10:03 ` Yong Zhang
2011-12-05 16:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=1323190602.30977.94.camel@frodo \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=darren@dvhart.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=patches@linaro.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yong.zhang0@gmail.com \
/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.