lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 9 Nov 1999 17:24:22 +0100 (MET)
FromRoman Zippel <>
SubjectRe: 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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [from the cache]
©2003-2010