Re: [PATCH] Abstracted Priority Inheritance for RT

[Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk>]

On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Daniel Walker wrote:

> 
> 
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Esben Nielsen wrote:
> > 
> > Let us say you have task1 waiting on task2 waiting on task3 waiting on
> > task4 etc. When you try to boost the prorities you will set the priority
> > of each task using the hook, right? In the hook you will set the priority
> > of the next task using the hook, right? ....
> 
> No .. The callback doesn't change priorities, it just signals that a
> priority has changed. The priority changing is iterative, and there is a
> function added to sched.c (not in my patch, but in the RT patch) to
> actualy change the priorities. My patch only adds a new structure to the
> prioritiy inheritance that was already in the RT patch, I'm not remaking
> the actualy PI code. 
>
Good :-)
I asked the question because I considered (and started but didn't
have time) doing what you have done. I wanted to generalise the rt_mutex
to have real rw_lock as well - which was dropped due to the
non-deterministc behavioir even with PI. To do that I needed to have the
recursion and the callback..
 
Esben

> Daniel
> 

-
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/