Re: [patch 0/3] sched: Make Priority Inheritance POSIX compliant

[John Kacur]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 10:06 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 20:58 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> The current PI implementation violates POSIX scheduling semantics when
>> a thread is deboosted. The following patch series adresses this.
>>
>> Thanks and Kudos go to Mathias Weber and Carsten Emde for analysis,
>> test cases and initial workaround patches.

Oh, that sounds good - would you like to share the test cases for our
rt-test suite?

>
> These look fine to me,
>
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> --
> 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/
>
--
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/