>From: Ingo Molnar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >* Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >OTOH, deadlock detection is another issue. It's quite expensive and i'm >> >not sure we want to make it a runtime thing. But for fusyn's deadlock >> >detection and safe teardown on owner-exit is a must-have i suspect? >> >> Not really. Deadlock check is needed on PI, so it can be done at the >> same time (you have to walk the chain anyway). In any other case, it >> is an option you can request (or not). > >well, i was talking about the mutex code in PREEMPT_RT. There deadlock >detection is an optional debug feature. You dont _have_ to do deadlock >detection for the kernel's locks, and there's a difference in >performance.
Big mouth'o mine :-| Let me re-phrase then: it is a must have only on PI, to make sure you don't have a loop when doing it. Maybe is a consequence of the algorithm I chose. -However- it should be possible to disable it in cases where you are reasonably sure it won't happen (such as kernel code). In any case, AFAIR, I still did not implement it. Was this more useful? -- Inaky - 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/
