gt; for better performance.
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* Gaurav Jain [mailto:gjainroor...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, February 08, 2013 11:54 AM
>>
>> *To:* Jeff Haran
>> *Subject:* Re: Kernel code interrupted
On Sun, 2013-02-10 at 00:47 +0800, Peter Teoh wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:22 AM, Frederic Weisbecker
> wrote:
> 2013/2/9 Peter Teoh :
> > A search in the entire subtree of arch/x86/ and including
> all its
> > subdirectories, (for 3.2.0 kernel) return
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:22 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/2/9 Peter Teoh :
> > A search in the entire subtree of arch/x86/ and including all its
> > subdirectories, (for 3.2.0 kernel) return only TWO result where
> > preempt_schedule_irq is called: kernel/entry_64.S and
> kernel/entry_
2013/2/9 anish kumar :
> Thanks Frederic.
> On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 08:44 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> In the case you have CONFIG_PREEMPT and it's the turn for some other
>> task to be scheduled, the function preempt_schedule_irq() is called
>> right before the irq return to the interrupted
2013/2/9 Peter Teoh :
> A search in the entire subtree of arch/x86/ and including all its
> subdirectories, (for 3.2.0 kernel) return only TWO result where
> preempt_schedule_irq is called: kernel/entry_64.S and kernel/entry_32.S.
> And the called is in fact resume_kernel(), ie, it is NOT calle
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:07 PM, anish kumar wrote:
> Thanks Frederic.
> On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 08:44 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 2013/2/8 Gaurav Jain :
> > > What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's say
> > > executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted
Thanks Frederic.
On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 08:44 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 2013/2/8 Gaurav Jain :
> > What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's say
> > executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted by the Timer - which is
> > apparently allowed in 2.6 onwards
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Peter Teoh wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 3:51 PM, anish kumar
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 14:57 +0800, Peter Teoh wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, anish kumar
>> > .
>> > Timer interrupts is supposed to cause scheduling a
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 3:51 PM, anish kumar wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 14:57 +0800, Peter Teoh wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, anish kumar
> > .
> > Timer interrupts is supposed to cause scheduling and scheduler
> > may or
> > may not pick up your las
On Sat, 2013-02-09 at 14:57 +0800, Peter Teoh wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, anish kumar
> .
> Timer interrupts is supposed to cause scheduling and scheduler
> may or
> may not pick up your last process(we always use the term
> "task" in
> ke
2013/2/8 Gaurav Jain :
> What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's say
> executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted by the Timer - which is
> apparently allowed in 2.6 onwards kernels.
>
> My understanding is that once the interrupt handler is done executing, we
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:47 PM, anish kumar
.
>
> Timer interrupts is supposed to cause scheduling and scheduler may or
> may not pick up your last process(we always use the term "task" in
> kernel space) after handling timer interrupt.
> >
>
Sorry if I may disagree, correct me if wrong. Timer i
On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 18:08 +0100, Gaurav Jain wrote:
> What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's
> say executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted by the Timer
> - which is apparently allowed in 2.6 onwards kernels.
>
>
> My understanding is that once the inter
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:08 AM, Peter Teoh wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Gaurav Jain wrote:
>
>> What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's say
>> executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted by the Timer - which
>> is apparently allowed in 2.6 onwa
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 1:08 AM, Gaurav Jain wrote:
> What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's say
> executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted by the Timer - which
> is apparently allowed in 2.6 onwards kernels.
>
> My understanding is that once the interrupt
What happens if the kernel executing in some process context (let's say
executing a time-consuming syscall) gets interrupted by the Timer - which
is apparently allowed in 2.6 onwards kernels.
My understanding is that once the interrupt handler is done executing, we
should switch back to where the
16 matches
Mail list logo