Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263011AbVDLVeP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:34:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262996AbVDLVaY (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:30:24 -0400 Received: from fmr19.intel.com ([134.134.136.18]:36505 "EHLO orsfmr004.jf.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262551AbVDLV3R convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:29:17 -0400 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Subject: RE: FUSYN and RT Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:28:58 -0700 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: FUSYN and RT Thread-Index: AcU/piSu4EH5tLoPQn24o0OFqvJjTQAADB3Q From: "Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" To: , Cc: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Apr 2005 21:29:00.0216 (UTC) FILETIME=[A437AB80:01C53FA6] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 714 Lines: 21 >From: Daniel Walker [mailto:dwalker@mvista.com] > >> Well yeah, but you could lock a fusyn, then invoke a system call which >> locks a kernel semaphore. > >Right .. For deadlock detection, I want to assume that the fusyn lock is >on the outer level. That way both deadlock detection system will work >properly (in theory). So that would mean to create a restriction (which is implicit now, anyway): "a system call cannot return holding an rt-mutex" right? -- Inaky - 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/