Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 9 Nov 1999 17:24:22 +0100 (MET) | | From | Roman Zippel <> | | Subject | Re: linux interrupt handling problem |
| |
Hi,
On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Alan Cox wrote:
> I can find no requirement that sti() in interrupts actually does anything. > It seems quite permissible for it to be a non inside of an IRQ handler or > to only lower the level to the current irq level
1. I had such a patch already, but it was rejected by Jes for some reason. 2. It adds an extra check to an often used macro for spinlocks for only a few cases that could be avoided completly.
bye, Roman
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |