Re: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5
yodaiken@fsmlabs.com
Thu, 7 Feb 2002 12:58:53 -0700
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 01:40:59PM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
> > To really take any benefit from a preemptible kernel a lot of spin locks
> > will have to be replaced by mutex locks. The combi-lock approach may
> > convince more people who typically fear the higher scheduling pressure
> > of sleeping locks to do so, if they can decide on each instance which
> > approach (spin of sleep) will be taken.
>
> We shouldn't engage in wholesale changing of spinlocks to semaphores
> without a priority-inheritance mechanism. And _that_ is the bigger
> issue ...
Cool. We can then have the Solaris "this usually doesn't fail on test" priority
inherit read/write lock. I can hardly wait.
--
---------------------------------------------------------
Victor Yodaiken
Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company.
www.fsmlabs.com www.rtlinux.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/