[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] Re: setitimer lowlatency-2.2.13-A1 questions
    On Mon, 6 Dec 1999, Ingo Molnar wrote:

    >[..] we should do a BUG() if enable_bh() is called
    >with IRQs disabled - this will sort out the problems and solves the
    >latency issue as well.

    Only BUG() won't help the latency. And it seems not a problem.

    Why do you want to forbid people to enable_bh with irq disabled? there's
    nothing bad in doing so. You must _not_ run the bh handlers if you can't
    reenable irqs, but you _can_ reenable the bhs (for example for other cpus)
    even if you have irq disabled.


    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 13:55    [W:0.019 / U:1.932 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site