On Sat, 2005-03-05 at 00:18 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > On So 05-03-05 10:03:37, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 23:57 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > What prevents driver from being run on another CPU, maybe just doing > > > mdelay() between hardware accesses? > > > > Almost all drivers that I know have some sort of locking. Nothing nasty > > about it. Besides, you can't expect everything to be as simple as > > putting two bit of lego together, the problem isn't simple. > > If error() is allowed to sleep, then yes, its probably easy enough. If > it is not allowed to sleep, it will just postpone work to context that > is allowed to sleep, and it will probably be okay, too.
Yes, it's my itend that the notification callback is to be called in a task context where it can sleep. > => there are some locking issues, but they are probably easy > enough. Sorry for noise. > Pavel > -- Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
