Con Kolivas wrote:
On Sunday 04 June 2006 11:08, Peter Williams wrote:
3. Thanks to suggestions from Con Kolivas with respect to alternative
methods to reduce the possibility of a task being starved of CPU while
holding an important system resource, enforcement of caps is now
quite strict. However, there will still be occasions where caps may be
exceeded due to this mechanism vetoing enforcement.
Transcription bug here:
int fastcall __sched mutex_lock_interruptible(struct mutex *lock)
{
+ int ret;
+
might_sleep();
return __mutex_fastpath_lock_retval
(&lock->count, __mutex_lock_interruptible_slowpath);
should be ret =
How embarrassing. I wonder why I didn't notice an "unreachable code"
warning here?
Thanks
Peter
--
Peter Williams [email protected]
"Learning, n. The kind of ignorance distinguishing the studious."
-- Ambrose Bierce
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
