> _please_ We can do better than this. Only semaphores (not spinlocks) need
> to have the priority inheritance. [...]
nope there are _not_ only semaphores, but many other types of locks.
> [...] This can be done with lists off the
> semaphore and tasks... [...]
it's _not_ easy to extend Linux semaphores to handle priority inheritance.
currently semaphore operations can be done via hw-atomic test-and-set
instructions. If we do anything more complex, we cannot use simple
instructions anymore. Linux semaphores are 2 instructions for an up() and
2 for a down(), and thats one of our crown jewels :)
the whole point is not quite valid, RT and filesystem IO doesnt mix well
anyway ... the solution: use system calls that are guaranteed to not
block, either by design, or by system policy (ie. separate filesystem on a
RAMDISK) ... or use a device that doesnt introduce large latencies.
(RAMdisk or solid state disk)
-- mingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/