On 3/10/07, Sergey Vlasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 16:10:29 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
> Thanks Parav, adding singal_allow(SIGALRM) wakeup the blocking
> interruptible_sleep_on and checking the signal_pending would return
> true now.
This means that there is also a bug in your
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 16:10:29 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
> Thanks Parav, adding singal_allow(SIGALRM) wakeup the blocking
> interruptible_sleep_on and checking the signal_pending would return
> true now.
This means that there is also a bug in your userspace program -
somehow when it invokes ioctl(),
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 16:10:29 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
Thanks Parav, adding singal_allow(SIGALRM) wakeup the blocking
interruptible_sleep_on and checking the signal_pending would return
true now.
This means that there is also a bug in your userspace program -
somehow when it invokes ioctl(), it
On 3/10/07, Sergey Vlasov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 16:10:29 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
Thanks Parav, adding singal_allow(SIGALRM) wakeup the blocking
interruptible_sleep_on and checking the signal_pending would return
true now.
This means that there is also a bug in your
On 3/8/07, Parav K Pandit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luong Ngo
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:54 AM
To: Robert Hancock
Cc: linux-kernel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sleeping thread not receive
On 3/9/07, Sergey Vlasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:52:07 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
[...]
> static irqreturn board_isr(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs* regs)
> {
> spin_lock(>lock);
>if (dev->irqMask & (1 << irqBit)) {
> // Set the interrupt event mask
>
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:52:07 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
[...]
> static irqreturn board_isr(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs* regs)
> {
> spin_lock(>lock);
>if (dev->irqMask & (1 << irqBit)) {
> // Set the interrupt event mask
> dev->irqEvent |= (1 << irqBit);
>
> // Disable this
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:52:07 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
[...]
static irqreturn board_isr(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs* regs)
{
spin_lock(dev-lock);
if (dev-irqMask (1 irqBit)) {
// Set the interrupt event mask
dev-irqEvent |= (1 irqBit);
// Disable this irq, it
On 3/9/07, Sergey Vlasov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 14:52:07 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
[...]
static irqreturn board_isr(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs* regs)
{
spin_lock(dev-lock);
if (dev-irqMask (1 irqBit)) {
// Set the interrupt event mask
On 3/8/07, Parav K Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luong Ngo
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:54 AM
To: Robert Hancock
Cc: linux-kernel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sleeping thread not receive signal until
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luong Ngo
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:54 AM
To: Robert Hancock
Cc: linux-kernel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sleeping thread not receive signal until it wakes up
On 3/8/07, Robert Hancock <[EM
On 3/8/07, Robert Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Luong Ngo wrote:
> Hi Thomas and Dick,
> I appreciate all the responses. They are very good information to me.
> Actually, it wasn't me working on the driver but it's been there long
> time. I thought I just need to add the signal and signal
Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi Thomas and Dick,
I appreciate all the responses. They are very good information to me.
Actually, it wasn't me working on the driver but it's been there long
time. I thought I just need to add the signal and signal handling
part, not expecting it would lead me to the driver
On 3/8/07, Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 08:01 -0500, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
> > Anything kernel configuration I need to be aware of to enable
> > preemption in kernel?
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> > LNgo
> >
>
> First, in the ioctl, if you need spin-locks,
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 08:01 -0500, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
> > Anything kernel configuration I need to be aware of to enable
> > preemption in kernel?
> >
> >
> > Thank you,
> > LNgo
> >
>
> First, in the ioctl, if you need spin-locks, you need to use
>
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
> On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am having this problem. I have a process
On 3/8/07, Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 08:01 -0500, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
Anything kernel configuration I need to be aware of to enable
preemption in kernel?
Thank you,
LNgo
First, in the ioctl, if you need spin-locks, you need to use
Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi Thomas and Dick,
I appreciate all the responses. They are very good information to me.
Actually, it wasn't me working on the driver but it's been there long
time. I thought I just need to add the signal and signal handling
part, not expecting it would lead me to the driver
On 3/8/07, Robert Hancock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi Thomas and Dick,
I appreciate all the responses. They are very good information to me.
Actually, it wasn't me working on the driver but it's been there long
time. I thought I just need to add the signal and signal
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Luong Ngo
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 8:54 AM
To: Robert Hancock
Cc: linux-kernel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sleeping thread not receive signal until it wakes up
On 3/8/07, Robert Hancock [EMAIL
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi all,
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the
On Thu, 2007-03-08 at 08:01 -0500, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
Anything kernel configuration I need to be aware of to enable
preemption in kernel?
Thank you,
LNgo
First, in the ioctl, if you need spin-locks, you need to use
spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock/irqrestore. The ones
On 3/7/07, Lee Revell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interruptible_sleep_on is interruptible, but for your task to
> actually be awakened and your alarm handler to get some CPU,
> it needs to be scheduled. If the BKL (big kernel lock)
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
>>> of the thread will keep
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Interruptible_sleep_on is interruptible, but for your task to
actually be awakened and your alarm handler to get some CPU,
it needs to be scheduled. If the BKL (big kernel lock) is
held, it won't be scheduled until it is released.
On Mar 7 2007 08:19, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
>
>Later versions of the kernel lock the kernel when an ioctl() is
>entered. This means that if you sleep in the ioctl(), nothing
>will get scheduled.
Later versions of the kernel also have an ->unlocked_ioctl method,
which is probably better
>
> On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
>>> of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
>>> kernel and will be
Hi Dick,
Thanks for your response. In my ioctl in the kernel, I use
interruptible_sleep_on to sleep on a queue and will be wake up by the
the ISR routine when interrupt happens, so isn't
interruptible_sleep_on supposed to be interruptable, from its name? I
am using kernel 2.6.14.
Thanks again,
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:31:37 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
> I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
> of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
> kernel and will be blocked if there is no new information. If there is
> information retured, the
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
> of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
> kernel and will be blocked if there is no new information. If there is
> information retured, the
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi all,
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
kernel and will be blocked if there is no new information. If there is
information retured, the thread will
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:31:37 -0800 Luong Ngo wrote:
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
kernel and will be blocked if there is no new information. If there is
information retured, the thread
Hi Dick,
Thanks for your response. In my ioctl in the kernel, I use
interruptible_sleep_on to sleep on a queue and will be wake up by the
the ISR routine when interrupt happens, so isn't
interruptible_sleep_on supposed to be interruptable, from its name? I
am using kernel 2.6.14.
Thanks again,
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi all,
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
kernel and will be blocked if there is no
On Mar 7 2007 08:19, linux-os (Dick Johnson) wrote:
Later versions of the kernel lock the kernel when an ioctl() is
entered. This means that if you sleep in the ioctl(), nothing
will get scheduled.
Later versions of the kernel also have an -unlocked_ioctl method,
which is probably better than
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interruptible_sleep_on is interruptible, but for your task to
actually be awakened and your alarm handler to get some CPU,
it needs to be scheduled. If the BKL (big kernel lock) is
held, it won't be scheduled until it is released.
You
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Luong Ngo wrote:
Hi all,
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get
On 3/7/07, Lee Revell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/07, linux-os (Dick Johnson) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interruptible_sleep_on is interruptible, but for your task to
actually be awakened and your alarm handler to get some CPU,
it needs to be scheduled. If the BKL (big kernel lock) is
Hi all,
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
kernel and will be blocked if there is no new information. If there is
information retured, the thread will be checked to see if any error
happens and
Hi all,
I am having this problem. I have a process with 2 threads created. One
of the thread will keep calling IOCTL to get information from the
kernel and will be blocked if there is no new information. If there is
information retured, the thread will be checked to see if any error
happens and
40 matches
Mail list logo
