From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:08:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:08:22 -0400 Received: from mail1.qualcomm.com ([129.46.64.223]:57761 "EHLO mail1.qualcomm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:08:17 -0400 Message-Id: <4.3.1.0.20010823110325.01ffb460@mail1> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.1 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2001 11:07:26 -0700 To: george anzinger From: Maksim Krasnyanskiy Subject: Re: tasklet question... Cc: "Raj, Ashok" , "Linux-Kernel (E-mail)" In-Reply-To: <3B853D40.33BD96D9@mvista.com> In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.0.20010822153241.01f40100@mail1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Does the tasklet get run again on the same interrupt (assuming that >tasklets are run at the end of irq processing) or the next one ? It will be run as soon as possible e.g. won't wait for the next interrupt. >If the same, it would seem to be better to just do it. Nop. You should be nice to other tasklets/softirqs. Max Maksim Krasnyanskiy Senior Kernel Engineer Qualcomm Incorporated maxk@qualcomm.com http://bluez.sf.net http://vtun.sf.net