http://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14937
Thomas Hellström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|FIXED |
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Hellström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-04-13 01:17:19
PST ---
I think this fix is partially incorrect.
The idea of tasklets is that you should be able to run a "bottom half" of the
IRQ handler with hard IRQs enabled.
Data that is shared between a hard interrupt handler and a tasklet or a normal
process should use spin_lock_irqsave() whereas data shared between a tasklet
and a normal process should use spin_lock_bh()
So in this case, I think we should be using spin_lock_bh() to avoid unnecessary
disabling of hard IRQs.
/Thomas
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100.
Use priority code J8TL2D2.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
--
_______________________________________________
Dri-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
