![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Albert Herranz <albert_herranz@yahoo.es> writes: >> > Should the local_irq_disable() call go away onece >> local_irq_save() got >> > introduced. >> >> Nope. The irqs need to be disabled. The save just >> allows this >> to be called in a context where irqs start out >> disabled. It is >> just a save. > > local_irq_save() also disables interrupts. Bah. I was thinking and reading local_save_flags().... So yes that does make the local_irq_disable redundant. I still used to seeing: save_flags(); cli(); ... restore_flags(); Eric - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-10-21 18:04 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||