Re: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread

[Lee Revell]

On Fri, 2005-06-10 at 12:39 -0700, Bill Huey wrote:
> Some of it is lack of displine with how various drivers do locking in
> that they overload the meaning of a spin_lock, etc... to also disable
> preemption and side effects with preempt_count. Making all of this
> formal
> is a good thing since it clarifies and un-ambiguates those code paths.
> It's something that should have been done in the first place 

Keep in mind there are large subsystems that are already RT safe like
ALSA.

Lee

-
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/