From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752019AbaG1BU1 (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:20:27 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:8521 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751243AbaG1BU0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2014 21:20:26 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,745,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="568099240" From: Andi Kleen To: Sergey Oboguev Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, khalid.aziz@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: deferred set priority (dprio) References: Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2014 18:19:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Sergey Oboguev's message of "Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:45:21 -0700") Message-ID: <8738dm9t4z.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sergey Oboguev writes: > [This is a repost of the message from few day ago, with patch file > inline instead of being pointed by the URL.] Have you checked out the preemption control that was posted some time ago? It did essentially the same thing, but somewhat simpler than your patch. http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1403.0/00780.html Yes I agree with you that lock preemption is a serious issue that needs solving. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only