Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.12-rc1-V0.7.41-07

[Ingo Molnar]

* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > yeah - i think Andrew said that a global lock at that particular place 
> > > might not be that much of an issue.
> > 
> > OK, I'll start stripping it out of my kernel today and make a clean
> > patch for you.
> 
> Ingo, I haven't forgotten about this, I just been heavily bug wacking 
> lately and just haven't had the time to do this.
> 
> I've pulled out both the lock_bh_state and lock_bh_journal_head and 
> made them two global locks.  I haven't noticed any slowing down here, 
> but then again I haven't ran any real benchmarks.  There's a BH flag 
> set to know when the lock is pending on a specific buffer head.
> 
> I don't know how acceptable this patch is. Take a look and if you have 
> any better ideas then let me know.  I prefer this patch over the 
> wait_on_bit patch I sent you earlier since this patch still accounts 
> for priority inheritance, as the wait_on_bits don't.

looks much cleaner than earlier ones. Would it be possible to make the 
locks per journal? I've applied it to the -44-05 kernel so that it gets 
some testing.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/