Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:35:27 +0200 | From | Jarek Poplawski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] genirq: handle_fasteoi_irq vs IRQ_INPROGRESS && IRQ_DISABLED |
| |
On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 11:17:00AM +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > Hi, > > I've still some doubts about these irq handlers and I hope somebody > could explain some of these (despite my problems with earlier such > explanations, sorry...): > > 1. According to some well-known Intel's manual (vol.3A page 8-41) > lapic can interrupt irq handler dispatching higher-priority irq; it > seems, such an event is possible during handle_IRQ_event, and would > be treated by "common" handlers with IRQ_INPROGRESS; but:
OOPS!!! Of course, I got this wrong again: this IRQ_INPROGRESS is for another irq... Sorry!
But, then, it seems such IRQ_INPROGRESS shouldn't be possible at all with properly working lapic? Or do I miss something...
Jarek P. - 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/
| |