Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751367AbWBQE5w (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:57:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751360AbWBQE5w (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:57:52 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:61071 "EHLO ozlabs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751367AbWBQE5v (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Feb 2006 23:57:51 -0500 Subject: Robust futexes From: Rusty Russell To: Ingo Molnar Cc: lkml - Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 15:57:51 +1100 Message-Id: <1140152271.25078.42.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.2.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 793 Lines: 22 Hi Ingo, all, Noticed (via LWN, hence the delay) your robust futex work. Have you considered the less-perfect, but simpler option of simply having futex calls which tell the kernel that the u32 value is in fact the holder's TID? In this case, you don't get perfect robustness when TID wrap occurs: the kernel won't know that the lock holder is dead. However, it's simple, and telling the kernel that the lock is the tid allows the kernel to do prio inheritence etc. in future. Cheers! Rusty. -- ccontrol: http://ozlabs.org/~rusty/ccontrol - 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/