Re: [RT] bad BUG_ON in rtmutex.c

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>]

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 11:06 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, Daniel Walker wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:32 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Actually, where that BUG_ON was is the exiting of the chain walk. So it
> > > does stop.  It's the higher priority task that needs to be continuing
> > > the chain walk for that problem to occur.  So really, it already does
> > > what you suggest :)
> >
> > I bet you could test for that condition in some other spots too . Like
> > when it adds to the pi_waiters , you could test if the priorities are
> > out of sync ..
> 
> You mean the other places in rt_mutex_adjust_prio_chain?  It already
> checks once an iteration, anything more is just over kill.

Yeah, sounds good .

> Actually, I always thought that running PREEMPT_DESKTOP with soft and hard
> IRQS as threads was priority ceiling.  It's just that all locks have the
> priority of MAX_RT_PRIO (no preemption allowed).  OK, this doesn't apply
> to mutexes, but it does apply for spin_locks. :)

Interesting way to look at it .

Reminds me of the RT read/write locks, only one read or one writer at a
time, so it's really just a mutex ..

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/