From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@verizon.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "K.R. Foley" <kr@cybsft.com>,
Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
Rui Nuno Capela <rncbc@rncbc.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.43-00
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 22:47:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050404204725.GA17818@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1112647253.5147.17.camel@localhost.localdomain>
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > actually, what priorities do the yielding tasks have? sched_yield() does
> > not guarantee that the CPU will be given up, of if a highest-prio
> > SCHED_FIFO task is in a yield() loop it will livelock the system.
>
> What scares me is the code in fs/inode.c with that
> __wait_on_freeing_inode. Look at the code in find_inode and
> find_inode_fast. Here you will see that they really are busy loops
> with a yield in them, if the inode they are waiting on is I_FREEING or
> I_CLEAR and the process doing this hasn't set I_LOCK. I haven't
> looked much at this, but my kernel has livelocked on it.
ok, makes sense.
> Currently my fix is in yield to lower the priority of the task calling
> yield and raise it after the schedule. This is NOT a proper fix. It's
> just a hack so I can get by it and test other parts.
yeah, yield() is a quite RT-incompatible concept, which could livelock
an upstream kernel just as much - if the task in question is SCHED_FIFO.
Almost all yield() uses should be eliminated from the upstream kernel,
step by step.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-04 20:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-25 14:59 [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.41-10 Ingo Molnar
2005-03-25 22:33 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-25 22:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-03-26 5:14 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-27 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-03-30 5:16 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-30 6:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-03-29 22:31 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-30 8:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-03-31 8:55 ` [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.41-25 Ingo Molnar
2005-04-01 10:47 ` [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.43-00 Ingo Molnar
2005-04-01 12:13 ` Rui Nuno Capela
2005-04-01 12:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-01 14:42 ` Rui Nuno Capela
2005-04-01 15:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-01 15:52 ` Rui Nuno Capela
2005-04-01 16:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-01 21:26 ` Rui Nuno Capela
2005-04-01 17:31 ` Gene Heskett
2005-04-01 18:27 ` K.R. Foley
2005-04-01 18:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-01 19:21 ` Gene Heskett
2005-04-01 19:19 ` Gene Heskett
2005-04-01 19:22 ` K.R. Foley
2005-04-01 23:34 ` Gene Heskett
2005-04-02 1:45 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-02 2:30 ` Gene Heskett
2005-04-02 5:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-02 19:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-02 20:06 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-02 20:17 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-02 20:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-02 22:38 ` Gene Heskett
2005-04-02 20:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-02 20:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-02 22:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-03 0:06 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-04 20:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-04 20:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-04 20:47 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2005-04-04 21:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-04 22:51 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2005-04-04 22:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-04 23:09 ` Esben Nielsen
2005-04-05 7:57 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2005-04-05 15:18 ` Mike Galbraith
2005-04-04 23:06 ` Esben Nielsen
2005-04-05 5:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-05 9:25 ` Esben Nielsen
2005-04-02 23:45 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-02 20:10 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-05 7:19 ` [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc2-V0.7.44-00 Ingo Molnar
2005-04-05 19:06 ` Rui Nuno Capela
2005-04-05 19:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-08 15:22 ` Rui Nuno Capela
2005-04-08 17:15 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-08 20:15 ` K.R. Foley
2005-04-08 20:17 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-08 20:26 ` K.R. Foley
2005-04-08 21:00 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-08 21:36 ` K.R. Foley
2005-04-10 17:23 ` K.R. Foley
2005-04-10 17:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-10 17:39 ` Steven Rostedt
2005-04-10 17:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-12 18:17 ` Lee Revell
2005-04-21 7:35 ` [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc3-V0.7.46-00 Ingo Molnar
2005-04-21 8:45 ` Paolo Ciarrocchi
2005-04-21 16:16 ` Daniel Walker
2005-04-21 19:54 ` Daniel Walker
2005-04-22 6:27 ` [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc3-V0.7.46-01 Ingo Molnar
2005-04-22 7:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-22 15:48 ` Daniel Walker
2005-04-22 15:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-22 15:53 ` Daniel Walker
2005-04-22 15:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-22 15:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-26 17:49 ` Daniel Walker
2005-05-09 7:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-22 21:06 ` Inaky Perez-Gonzalez
2005-04-22 21:15 ` Daniel Walker
2005-05-04 8:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-04-22 21:17 ` Daniel Walker
2005-04-30 23:28 ` Lee Revell
2005-05-04 8:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-05-04 15:05 ` Lee Revell
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=20050404204725.GA17818@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=gene.heskett@verizon.net \
--cc=kr@cybsft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=rncbc@rncbc.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/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.