Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261512AbTHYNZa (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:25:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261761AbTHYNZa (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:25:30 -0400 Received: from c210-49-248-224.thoms1.vic.optusnet.com.au ([210.49.248.224]:20928 "EHLO mail.kolivas.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261512AbTHYNZ2 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 09:25:28 -0400 From: Con Kolivas To: mru@users.sourceforge.net (=?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=20Rullg=E5rd?=), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH]O18.1int Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 23:32:25 +1000 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3 References: <200308231555.24530.kernel@kolivas.org> <200308252228.37937.kernel@kolivas.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308252332.25110.kernel@kolivas.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1545 Lines: 35 On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 22:49, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote: > Con Kolivas writes: > >> >> >> Vanilla test1 has the spin effect. Test2 doesn't. I haven't > >> >> >> tried vanilla test3 or test4. As I've said, the O16.2-O16.3 patch > >> >> >> introduced the problem. With that patch reversed, everything is > >> >> >> fine. What problem does that patch fix? > >> >> > > >> >> > It's a generic fix for priority inversion but it induces badness in > >> >> > smp, and latency in task preemption on up so it's not suitable. > >> >> > >> >> Now I'm confused. If that patch is bad, then why is it in O18? > >> > > >> > No, the 16.2 patch is bad. 16.3 backed it out. > >> > >> OK, but it somehow made XEmacs behave badly. > > > > Well it was a generic fix in 16.2 that helped XEmacs as I said. O15 > > also had a generic fix (child not preempting it's parent) but that > > too was covering up the real issue, but it wasnt as drastic as 16.2. > > Of the kernels I've tested, only test1 vanilla and O16.3 and later > show the problem. Btw, is it related to the XEmacs regexp search > problem, or is that a different one? Same thing. Both examples of priority inversion. In your case a parent child interaction which was worked around in O15. That interaction seems the more common case. Con - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/