Re: Real-Time Preemption and UML?

From: Ingo Molnar (mingo_at_elte.hu)
Date: 02/08/05

  • Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.11-rc3-V0.7.38-01" 
    Date:	Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:39:35 +0100
To: Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk>

    * Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk> wrote:

    > Well, I keep trying a little bit more. In the mean while you can get
    > some of the stuff I needed to change to at least get it to compile:
    >
    > One of the problems was use of direct architecture specific semaphores
    > (which doesn't work under PREEMPT_REALTIME) and in places where a
    > quick (maybe too quick) look at the code told me that completions
    > ought to be used. Therefore I changed two semaphores to completions
    > which compiled fine. I have tried the change on 2.6.11-rc2, and it
    > seemed to work, but I have not tested it heavily.

    Jeff, any objections against adding this change to UML at some point?
    It's at most a cleanup for now (PREEMPT_RT not being an upstream
    feature), but it makes life easier if 'more exotic' semaphore details
    are not being relied on (even if that reliance is 100% correct
    currently).

            Ingo
    -
    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/

  • Next message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.11-rc3-V0.7.38-01"
    Loading