From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755437AbYH0K5m (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:57:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754316AbYH0K5e (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:57:34 -0400 Received: from ns1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:38739 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753524AbYH0K5d (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Aug 2008 06:57:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:57:31 +0200 From: Nick Piggin To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Gregory Haskins , mingo@elte.hu, srostedt@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, gregory.haskins@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] sched: make double-lock-balance fair Message-ID: <20080827105731.GC5818@wotan.suse.de> References: <20080826173131.16413.17862.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <20080826173500.16413.40514.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <1219825295.6462.54.camel@twins> <20080827102646.GA5818@wotan.suse.de> <1219833668.6462.72.camel@twins> <20080827105615.GB5818@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080827105615.GB5818@wotan.suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:56:15PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:41:08PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Does it make sense to make this _double_lock_balance() thing depend on > > that too? > > Hmm, you might have a good point there. Greg? > > BTW. I wonder about other architectures that are of interest to -rt? Like > mips or arm perhaps... Any plans to implement ticket locks on those, or > do they not tend to be used in SMP configurations on -rt yte? Oh, or maybe I guess again: -rt might be using Greg's generic ticket lock implementation?