On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 23:29:32 +0100 (CET)
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > > > When we allow multiple readers, this will be allowed. But even in
> > > > mainline, if a writer were to come in and block between those two
> > > > down_read_trylocks(), the seco
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 23:29:32 +0100 (CET)
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > When we allow multiple readers, this will be allowed. But even in
> > > mainline, if a writer were to come in and block between those two
> > > down_read_trylocks(), the second trylock would fail.
> > >
> > > PREEMPT_RT just ha
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:50:41 +0100
> > Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> >
> > > On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Mike Galbraith
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 17:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 10:00 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:43:24 +0100
> > Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for the explanation. So is this considered a temporary failure
> > > until multiple readers are allowed or does c
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:50:41 +0100
> Juerg Haefliger wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Mike Galbraith
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 17:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > > Dear RT Folks,
> > > >
> > > > I'm pleased to announ
On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 10:00 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:43:24 +0100
> Juerg Haefliger wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the explanation. So is this considered a temporary failure
> > until multiple readers are allowed or does cpufreq need fixing or
> > something else? Just trying
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:50:41 +0100 Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> The cpufreq code does nested down_read_trylocks and only the first one
> succeeds:
>drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq.c:
>store
> down_read_trylock(cpufreq_rwsem) <- succeeds
> store_scaling_governor
>cpufreq_get_policy
> cpufreq_cpu_ge
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 15:43:24 +0100
Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> Thanks for the explanation. So is this considered a temporary failure
> until multiple readers are allowed or does cpufreq need fixing or
> something else? Just trying to figure out what to do next.
Good question. Unfortunately I don't k
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:50:41 +0100
> Juerg Haefliger wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Mike Galbraith
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 17:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> > > Dear RT Folks,
>> > >
>> > > I'm pleased to a
On Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:50:41 +0100
Juerg Haefliger wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Mike Galbraith
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 17:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > Dear RT Folks,
> > >
> > > I'm pleased to announce the 3.14.23-rt20 stable release.
> > >
> > > This is the fi
Resending to the list due to mailer/html issues.
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 17:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Dear RT Folks,
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce the 3.14.23-rt20 stable release.
> >
> > This is the first 3.14-rt release in the
On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 17:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Dear RT Folks,
>
> I'm pleased to announce the 3.14.23-rt20 stable release.
>
> This is the first 3.14-rt release in the stable-rt series. Normally I
> wait till the next development release is out before I pull in a new
> one. That is, I
Dear RT Folks,
I'm pleased to announce the 3.14.23-rt20 stable release.
This is the first 3.14-rt release in the stable-rt series. Normally I
wait till the next development release is out before I pull in a new
one. That is, I would pull in 3.14-rt when 3.16-rt or later was
released. But because
13 matches
Mail list logo
