Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1362694

Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock

From Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock
Date 2016-03-22 13:30 +0100
Message-ID <rftBE-4jp-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <raxZg-730-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rcB2G-4px-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <rfcAO-Zv-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <rfrJv-2ZK-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <rfsYW-3LD-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 12:32:21PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 11:21:53AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > And s390 does something entirely vile, no idea what.
> 
> For the two s390 usages tsk equals current. So it could be easily replaced
> with set_current_state().

Hmm indeed, I only saw tsk = find_task_by_pid_ns() and didn't look
further, but you do indeed have an assertion later that ensures task ==
current.

I still don't get that code though; why would you set the current task
state to UNINTERRUPTIBLE, also set need_resched, but then not call
schedule() at all.

Clearly something magical is going on and its not clear.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-03-21 19:20 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-22 11:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-03-22 12:50 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-22 13:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-03-22 14:30 +0100
          Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-22 15:00 +0100
            Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-03-22 15:50 +0100
              Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-22 17:50 +0100
                Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> - 2016-03-22 22:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 4/3] rtmutex: Avoid barrier in rt_mutex_handle_deadlock Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-03-25 03:40 +0100

csiph-web