RE: Thread starvation with mutex
"Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky" <[email protected]> Fri, 6 Feb 2004 14:37:41 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.phil |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> From: Luke Elliott > > Forgot to mention that this is on a UP machine with HT disabled. > > Can we call it "sensible" instead of fair..?! I think I'll go and read > up on some standards. Is there a reason why NPTL does not use this > "fair" method? Surely this is pretty normal, expected behaviour of a mutex? Would you please give it a shot under RTNPTL (http://developer.osdl.org/dev/robustmutexes) and tell me what happens? Still you program will fail unless you are in a deterministic scheduling policy. In SCHED_OTHER (or SCHED_NORMAL), the priority is moved up and down in a certain range of your nice level to accommodate for your CPU consumption and improve system responsiveness. Iñaky Pérez-González -- Not speaking for Intel -- all opinions are my own (and my fault)