Re: [PATCH] possible scheduler deadlock in 2.6.16

[Ingo Molnar]

* Anton Blanchard <anton@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> One way to solve this is to always take runqueues in cpu id order. To 
> do this we add a cpu variable to the runqueue and check it in the 
> double runqueue locking functions.
> 
> Thoughts?

it's fine with me - the overhead to double_rq_lock() is minimal, and 
it's not critical code either.

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>

	Ingo
-
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/