RE: [RFC/PATCH] FUSYN Realtime & robust mutexes for Linux, v2.3.1

[Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky]

> From: Ingo Molnar [mailto:mingo@xxxxxxx]
>
> and if fusyn.c is fast enough then we could even try to do normal
> futexes via fusyn.c - but not doing the registration/unregistration
> (hence losing the priority guarantee, but still sharing much of the
> codepath). This would be the most robust internal design i believe.

The priority guarantee or the robustness guarantee? I am guessing you
meant the second; the priority-based wakeup you will always get it.

Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own (and my fault)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/