Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261824AbVDHRLf (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:11:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262878AbVDHRLe (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:11:34 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:21489 "EHLO av.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261824AbVDHRL3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2005 13:11:29 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Priority Lists for the RT mutex From: Daniel Walker Reply-To: dwalker@mvista.com To: Ingo Molnar Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sdietrich@mvista.com, inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com, Steven Rostedt , Esben Nielsen In-Reply-To: <20050408062811.GA19204@elte.hu> References: <1112896344.16901.26.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> <20050408062811.GA19204@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: MontaVista Message-Id: <1112980281.22429.9.camel@dhcp153.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-4) Date: 08 Apr 2005 10:11:23 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 783 Lines: 23 On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 23:28, Ingo Molnar wrote: > this one looks really clean. > > it makes me wonder, what is the current status of fusyn's? Such a light > datastructure would be much more mergeable upstream than the former > 100-queues approach. Inaky was telling me that 100 queues approach is two years old. The biggest problem is that fusyn has it's own PI system .. So it's not clear if that will work with the RT mutex,. I was thinking the PI stuff could be made generic so, fusyn, maybe futex, can use it also . Daniel - 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/