Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] low-latency scheduling patch for 2.4.0
From: george anzinger (george_AT_mvista.com)
Date: Mon Jan 15 2001 - 07:27:37 EET
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Nigel Gamble writes:
> > That's why MontaVista's kernel preemption patch uses sleeping mutex
> > locks instead of spinlocks for the long held locks.
>
> Anyone who uses sleeping mutex locks is asking for trouble. Priority
> inversion is an issue I dearly hope we never have to deal with in the
> Linux kernel, and sleeping SMP mutex locks lead to exactly this kind
> of problem.
>
Exactly why we are going to us priority inherit mutexes. This handles
the inversion nicely.
George
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 23:21:00 EET