[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: PATCH pc_keyb and q40_keyb cleanup
    Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > Timer, bottomhalves (softirq) and tasklets (and softnet) are always
    > recalled with irq enabled. So if it would be called by timer/tasklet/bhhandler
    > it should use irq version of the spinlocks too if it needs to run with irq
    > locally disabled.
    > One thing you could safely change in keyboard_interrupt is to remove the save
    > part of the spinlock by using spin_lock_irq (we don't need to save anything
    > since keyboard_interrupt is only recalled as an irq handler).

    I understand SA_INTERRUPT, my question in the previous e-mail was more
    basic: keyboard_interrupt calls handle_kbd_event with local interrupts
    disabled. Why are local interrupts disabled?

    Jeff Garzik | The difference between laziness and
    Building 1024 | prioritization is the end result.
    MandrakeSoft |
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41    [W:0.020 / U:32.140 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site