* Josh Cartwright | 2016-03-08 12:26:56 [-0600]: >Is it really just about latency? Does this deferral not lead to an >inversion in the case where the single woken task isn't the highest >priority waiter on the completion (and doesn't run due to a >middle-priority thing spinning)? This would be case, yes. Not only with deferral. Say you have two waters: 1st one is MID-prio and the second is HI-prio. Currently after the wakeup of the MID-prio waiter you get preempted. Waking all of them at once would put the second waiter first on the CPU. Samething without the deferral flag. >In order for this to work, it seems like the chosen waiter would need to >inherit the highest priority of all waiters (which AFAICT isn't >happening). sorting the waiters by priority? This will be fun. This is only done for the rtmutex waiters. > Josh Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
