Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:05:45 -0600 | From | yodaiken@fsmlabs ... | Subject | Re: Calling current() from interrupt context |
| |
On Sun, Oct 08, 2000 at 03:58:55PM -0700, Mitchell Blank Jr wrote: > yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote: > > Looking at the code, I don't see any places where "current" is not valid. > > Got some examples? > > It's not that its invalid, it just doesn't make much sense. It points to > whatever task happened to be running when the interrupt happened. So > any attempt to access it is 99% likely to be a bug.
Bueno.
> > > BTW: there is an implicit reference to "current" in smp_processor_id. > > Yes, on architectures that use current->processor that is an exception > to the rule. After all, you know for sure that you're still on the > same CPU as the task currently running.
This makes sense. And I wish cpu architects would put a cpu-id register somewhere so that we could have fast computation of cpu-id on smp machines.
> > -Mitch
-- --------------------------------------------------------- Victor Yodaiken Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company. www.fsmlabs.com www.rtlinux.com
- 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/
|  |