Date: Fri, 19 May 2000 08:42:37 +0200 From: Michael Schuster - TSC SunOS Germany <michael.schuster@germany.sun.com> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>, Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>, Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: A new api for asynchronous task execution Message-ID: <3924E25D.DEB9F987@germany.sun.com> References: <200005190529.WAA06634@mass.cdrom.com> <3924E16A.B1123749@softweyr.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Wes Peters wrote: > > Mike Smith wrote: > > > > > > If you are talking about running processes in > > > > order based on scheduling priority, this is propagated > > > > though mutexs which have been blocked on. > > > > > > No, speaking of temporarily elevating the priority of a process holding > > > a lock to the highest priority of all processes blocking on the lock. > > > > You could call this "priority lending" so that the rest of us understand > > what you're talking about. 8) > > The only system I've ever worked on that implements them refer to > them as inversion-safe or inversion-proof semaphores. I've never seen > another name, including "priority lending", in any literature or > article on the subject. 'scuse me for barging in - this sounds like what I know as "priority inheritance" (as one solution to the priority inversion problem). Are we talking of the same thing here? If no, what _is_ the difference? If yes, I could probably dig up one or two papers using these terms (we do at Sun, but that's not necessarily the place you're looking ... :-) cheers Michael -- Michael Schuster / Michael.Schuster@germany.sun.com Sun Microsystems GmbH / Richard-Reitzner Allee 8, D-85540 Haar (+49 89) 46008 974 / x12974 Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion' To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3924E25D.DEB9F987>