On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Remy Bohmer wrote:
Hello Steven,
The taker of a mutex must also be the one that releases it. I don't see
how you could use a mutex for this. It really requires some kind of
completion, or a compat_semaphore.
I tried several ways of working around the bug, even
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Remy Bohmer wrote:
* PI should only take place if it is for 100% sure that the 'struct
semaphore' is used as a mutex. And this is only the case when it is
initialised with init_MUTEX().
Well, we can't determine that with
Hello Steven,
It should print out warnings, do you have CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES set?
Nope, not yet... I will do that on Monday also. (On ARM I have as less
as debug options enabled per default, because it eats too much
CPU-power)
* PI should only take place if it is for 100% sure that the
On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 12:44 +0100, Remy Bohmer wrote:
Hello Steven,
The taker of a mutex must also be the one that releases it. I don't see
how you could use a mutex for this. It really requires some kind of
completion, or a compat_semaphore.
I tried several ways of working around the
Hello Daniel,
Thanks for looking into it also.
Steven already made clear to me that the 'struct semaphore' type on
the RT-kernel should not be used as a counting-semaphore, but as some
sort of legacy-mutex... (The confusion that this will cause is clear
by now...)
I still do not understand the
On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 18:09 +0100, Remy Bohmer wrote:
Actually, IMO, compat_semaphores behave like semaphores should behave,
and thus the same as they behave on a non-RT kernel, and at the
locations where the semaphores are now misused as mutexes on RT, we
should replace them by
* Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, IMO, compat_semaphores behave like semaphores should
behave, and thus the same as they behave on a non-RT kernel, and at
the locations where the semaphores are now misused as mutexes on RT,
we should replace them by
* Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 18:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Daniel Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, IMO, compat_semaphores behave like semaphores should
behave, and thus the same as they behave on a non-RT kernel, and at
the
On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 19:04 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
split the list with you? Feel free to take any of those :-) dev-sem is
nontrivial and probably not possible right now - and some of the others
might be problematic too. But there might be fixable ones in the list.
This shouldnt become
Sure, you want to split the list?
split the list with you? Feel free to take any of those :-) dev-sem is
nontrivial and probably not possible right now - and some of the others
might be problematic too. But there might be fixable ones in the list.
This shouldnt become like the BKL
10 matches
Mail list logo
