On 2019-08-20 20:01:14 [+0200], Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2019, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:08:18PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
> > > Bit spinlocks are problematic if PREEMPT_RT is enabled, because they
> > > disable preemption, which is undesired for
On Tue, 20 Aug 2019, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:08:18PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
> > Bit spinlocks are problematic if PREEMPT_RT is enabled, because they
> > disable preemption, which is undesired for latency reasons and breaks when
> > regular spinlocks are taken
On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 07:08:18PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote:
> Bit spinlocks are problematic if PREEMPT_RT is enabled, because they
> disable preemption, which is undesired for latency reasons and breaks when
> regular spinlocks are taken within the bit_spinlock locked region because
>
From: Thomas Gleixner
Bit spinlocks are problematic if PREEMPT_RT is enabled, because they
disable preemption, which is undesired for latency reasons and breaks when
regular spinlocks are taken within the bit_spinlock locked region because
regular spinlocks are converted to 'sleeping spinlocks'
4 matches
Mail list logo