From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robustmutexes@lists.osdl.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] FUSYN Realtime & robust mutexes for Linux, v2.3.1
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 12:34:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040805103409.GA20171@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F989B1573A3A644BAB3920FBECA4D25A6EC06D@orsmsx407>
* Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky <inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com> wrote:
> Fusyn aims to provide primitives to solve a bunch of gaps in POSIX
> compliance related to mutexes, conditional variables and semaphores,
> POSIX Advanced real-time support as well as adding mutex robustness
> (to dying owners) and deep deadlock checking.
the sched.c bits look clean enough.
i like the generic concept - keeping the userspace fast-path for
lock/unlock, like for futexes, and registering/unregistering a lock via
the kernel.
but, couldnt there be more sharing between futex.c and fusyn.c? In
particular on the API side, why arent all these ops done as an extension
to sys_futex()? That would keep the glibc part much simpler (and more
compatible) as well. You'd still get all the glory of implementing true
priority inheritance and advanced RT-locking for Linux :-)
or are the two interfaces way too different?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-05 13:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-04 9:13 [RFC/PATCH] FUSYN Realtime & robust mutexes for Linux, v2.3.1 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 6:21 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-05 7:06 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-08-05 7:17 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-05 7:37 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-08-05 7:40 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-05 8:22 ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-08-05 10:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-08-05 11:48 ` Rusty Russell
2004-08-05 13:23 ` Linh Dang
2004-08-05 13:26 ` Linh Dang
2004-08-05 14:02 ` Chris Friesen
2004-08-05 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2004-08-05 10:59 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-08-05 8:39 Eric Valette
2004-08-05 18:16 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:16 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:16 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:22 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:37 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:39 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:39 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
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=20040805103409.GA20171@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=drepper@redhat.com \
--cc=inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robustmutexes@lists.osdl.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox