Li Yu wrote:
>
> However, I found the sys_futex() do not use rt_mutex, so what's mean of the
> user futex you said?
> Even, I have not found any usage for rt_mutex in kernel code. Or, some
> beautiful story will happen in future?
>
Just need to look a little deeper :-)
sys_futex calls do_fut
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Li Yu wrote:
>
>>> Now since mutexes can be defined by user-land applications, we don't
>>>
>> want a DOS
>>
>>> type of application that nests large amounts of mutexes to create a large
>>> PI chain, and have the code holding spin locks while looking at a lar
Li Yu wrote:
>> Now since mutexes can be defined by user-land applications, we don't
> want a DOS
>> type of application that nests large amounts of mutexes to create a large
>> PI chain, and have the code holding spin locks while looking at a large
>> amount of data. So to prevent this, the implem
On Thu, 10 May 2007, Li Yu wrote:
Hi, Steven.
Nice to meet you again.
I have read the rt-mutex-design.txt that you wrote. That is excellent
description of rt_mutex. But I have a question for rt_mutex.
As you said:
Now since mutexes can be defined by user-land applications, we don't
want
Hi, Steven.
Nice to meet you again.
I have read the rt-mutex-design.txt that you wrote. That is excellent
description of rt_mutex. But I have a question for rt_mutex.
As you said:
> Now since mutexes can be defined by user-land applications, we don't
want a DOS
> type of application that nests
Hi, Steven.
Nice to meet you again.
I have read the rt-mutex-design.txt that you wrote. That is excellent
description of rt_mutex. But I have a question for rt_mutex.
As you said:
> Now since mutexes can be defined by user-land applications, we don't
want a DOS
> type of application that nests
6 matches
Mail list logo
