Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261622AbVBHS3i (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:29:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261624AbVBHS3i (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:29:38 -0500 Received: from lakshmi.addtoit.com ([198.99.130.6]:3594 "EHLO lakshmi.solana.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261622AbVBHS2j (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:28:39 -0500 Message-Id: <200502081855.j18ItFs0012685@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.1-RC1 To: Ingo Molnar cc: Esben Nielsen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Real-Time Preemption and UML? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 08 Feb 2005 09:39:35 +0100." <20050208083935.GB24669@elte.hu> References: <200502071835.j17IZMlS003456@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> <20050208083935.GB24669@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 13:55:15 -0500 From: Jeff Dike Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 585 Lines: 16 mingo@elte.hu said: > Jeff, any objections against adding this change to UML at some point? No, not at all. I just need to understand what CONFIG_PREEMPT requires of UML. >From a quick read of Documentation/preempt-locking.txt, this looks like it's implementing Rule #3 (unlock by the same task that locked), which looks fine. Jeff - 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/