Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.43-00

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 16:51 -0600, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:

> I'm sure a lot of the yield() users could be converted to 
> schedule_timeout(), some of the users i saw were for low memory conditions 
> where we want other tasks to make progress and complete so that we a bit 
> more free memory.
> 

I've stated earlier that I was locked up in fs/inode.c with the
__wait_on_freeing_inode. Can this be switched to a schedule_timeout?

Of course schedule_timeout is not too good with RT as well. Although you
can prevent a live_deadlock, but we bring up the problem of priority
inversion again. The process needing to run can still be starved by
another higher priority process that is lower in priority as the one
doing the waiting.

The schedule_timeout should stop the livelock. But what is the effect of
switching to it?

-- Steve


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