Re: pthread_mutex_unlock (was Re: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAPslow)

[Lee Revell]

On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 13:02 +0900, Samuel Masham wrote:
> On 26/01/06, Samuel Masham <samuel.masham@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > comment:
> > As a rt person I don't like the idea of scheduler bounce so the way
> > round seems to be have the mutex lock acquiring work on a FIFO like
> > basis.
> 
> which is obviously wrong...
> 
> Howeve my basic point stands but needs to be clarified a bit:
> 
> I think I can print non-compliant if the mutex acquisition doesn't
> respect the higher priority of the waiter over the current process
> even if the mutex is "available".
> 
> OK?

I don't think using an optional feature (PI) counts...

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/