Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:57 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But Greg may need to enforce it on his git tree that he mails these from > - are you referring to anything specific in this patch? > Thats what I don't get. I *did*

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 00:00 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > index c913d48..c24c53d 100644 > > > > --- a/kernel/sysctl.c > > > > +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c > > > > @@ -175,6 +175,10 @@ extern struct ctl_table inotify_table[]; > > > > int sysctl_legacy_va_layout; > > > > #endif > > > > >

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

Hi! > > > index c913d48..c24c53d 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/sysctl.c > > > +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c > > > @@ -175,6 +175,10 @@ extern struct ctl_table inotify_table[]; > > > int sysctl_legacy_va_layout; > > > #endif > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RTLOCK_LATERAL_STEAL > > > +extern int

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 22:53 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Add /proc/sys/kernel/lateral_steal, to allow switching on and off > > equal-priority mutex stealing between threads. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

Hi! > From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Add /proc/sys/kernel/lateral_steal, to allow switching on and off > equal-priority mutex stealing between threads. > > Signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > > kernel/rtmutex.c |7 ++- >

[(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Add /proc/sys/kernel/lateral_steal, to allow switching on and off equal-priority mutex stealing between threads. Signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- kernel/rtmutex.c |7 ++- kernel/sysctl.c | 14

[(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add /proc/sys/kernel/lateral_steal, to allow switching on and off equal-priority mutex stealing between threads. Signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- kernel/rtmutex.c |7 ++- kernel/sysctl.c | 14 ++ 2

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

Hi! From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add /proc/sys/kernel/lateral_steal, to allow switching on and off equal-priority mutex stealing between threads. Signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- kernel/rtmutex.c |7 ++- kernel/sysctl.c | 14

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 22:53 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! From: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] Add /proc/sys/kernel/lateral_steal, to allow switching on and off equal-priority mutex stealing between threads. Signed-off-by: Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

Hi! index c913d48..c24c53d 100644 --- a/kernel/sysctl.c +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c @@ -175,6 +175,10 @@ extern struct ctl_table inotify_table[]; int sysctl_legacy_va_layout; #endif +#ifdef CONFIG_RTLOCK_LATERAL_STEAL +extern int rtmutex_lateral_steal; +#endif +

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 00:00 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! index c913d48..c24c53d 100644 --- a/kernel/sysctl.c +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c @@ -175,6 +175,10 @@ extern struct ctl_table inotify_table[]; int sysctl_legacy_va_layout; #endif +#ifdef

Re: [(RT RFC) PATCH v2 2/9] sysctl for runtime-control of lateral mutex stealing

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:57 PM, in message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Sven-Thorsten Dietrich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But Greg may need to enforce it on his git tree that he mails these from - are you referring to anything specific in this patch? Thats what I don't get. I *did* checkpatch all