lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: PATCH 2.4.0.10.3: 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans