Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Timer, bottomhalves (softirq) and tasklets (and softnet) are always
> recalled with irq enabled. So if it would be called by timer/tasklet/bhhandler
> it should use irq version of the spinlocks too if it needs to run with irq
> locally disabled.
> 
> One thing you could safely change in keyboard_interrupt is to remove the save
> part of the spinlock by using spin_lock_irq (we don't need to save anything
> since keyboard_interrupt is only recalled as an irq handler).

I understand SA_INTERRUPT, my question in the previous e-mail was more
basic:  keyboard_interrupt calls handle_kbd_event with local interrupts
disabled.  Why are local interrupts disabled?

-- 
Jeff Garzik                    | The difference between laziness and
Building 1024                  | prioritization is the end result.
MandrakeSoft                   |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to