--- a/Journal/Paper.thy Thu Jul 07 13:32:09 2016 +0100
+++ b/Journal/Paper.thy Fri Jul 08 01:25:19 2016 +0100
@@ -184,6 +184,9 @@
for a process that inherited a higher priority and exits a critical
section ``{\it it resumes the priority it had at the point of entry
into the critical section}''. This error can also be found in the
+ textbook \cite[Section 16.4.1]{LiYao03} where the authors write
+ ``{\it its priority is immediately lowered to the level originally assigned}'';
+ or in the
more recent textbook \cite[Page 119]{Laplante11} where the authors
state: ``{\it when [the task] exits the critical section that caused
the block, it reverts to the priority it had when it entered that
@@ -207,7 +210,7 @@
priority.}'' The same error is also repeated later in this textbook.
- While \cite{Laplante11,Liu00,book,Sha90,Silberschatz13} are the only
+ While \cite{Laplante11,LiYao03,Liu00,book,Sha90,Silberschatz13} are the only
formal publications we have found that specify the incorrect
behaviour, it seems also many informal descriptions of PIP overlook
the possibility that another high-priority might wait for a