Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.13-rc4-V0.7.52-05

Gene Heskett
2005-07-31T15:56:56Z

On Sunday 31 July 2005 06:44, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
>> because end_buffer_async_read/write use bit_spin_(un)lock and I do
>> not know how those interact with -RT.
>
>bit_spin_lock is preemptible too - but it's not a too nice
> construct. What seems to have happened in your trace is that
> local_irq_disable() was used too in combination with bit-spinlocks,
> and a spinlock was taken from within it. The best fix would be to
> get rid of bit-spinlocks ...
>
> Ingo

And that refuses to build here, mode 4 for 52-05:

fs/nfsd/nfs4state.c:125: error: `SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED' undeclared here
(not in a function)
make[2]: *** [fs/nfsd/nfs4state.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [fs/nfsd] Error 2
make: *** [fs] Error 2

>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

--
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.