Linux MIPS Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* schedule() and mipsel processor
@ 2003-06-28  2:57 fpga dsp
  2003-06-29 17:35 ` Ralf Baechle
  2003-06-30 17:00 ` Jun Sun
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: fpga dsp @ 2003-06-28  2:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-mips

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 737 bytes --]

Hi all,
 
I may ask a stupid question here but I have problem of calling any functions such as interruptible_sleep_on_timeout, sleep_on ... in a timer handler, the kernel just crash straight away in the function schedule(). Now I go and do a diff between kern/sched.c on i686 source and mipsel source. clearly , they are different. So the question is from kernel programming point of view, the bottom-half of interrupt handler is still considered interrupt handler? I don't see any platform dependent code in the scheduler at all. So why a mips scheduler is different from intel scheduler ?
 
Many thanks
 
Duy Do



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mobile
- Check & compose your email via SMS on your Telstra or Vodafone mobile.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 933 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: schedule() and mipsel processor
  2003-06-28  2:57 schedule() and mipsel processor fpga dsp
@ 2003-06-29 17:35 ` Ralf Baechle
  2003-06-30 17:00 ` Jun Sun
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ralf Baechle @ 2003-06-29 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: fpga dsp; +Cc: linux-mips

On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 12:57:49PM +1000, fpga dsp wrote:

> I may ask a stupid question here but I have problem of calling any functions such as interruptible_sleep_on_timeout, sleep_on ... in a timer handler, the kernel just crash straight away in the function schedule(). Now I go and do a diff between kern/sched.c on i686 source and mipsel source. clearly , they are different. So the question is from kernel programming point of view, the bottom-half of interrupt handler is still considered interrupt handler? I don't see any platform dependent code in the scheduler at all. So why a mips scheduler is different from intel scheduler ?

Bs.  There was no need to change kernel/sched.c at all so you're probably
simply diffing the wrong versions.

  Ralf

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: schedule() and mipsel processor
  2003-06-28  2:57 schedule() and mipsel processor fpga dsp
  2003-06-29 17:35 ` Ralf Baechle
@ 2003-06-30 17:00 ` Jun Sun
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jun Sun @ 2003-06-30 17:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: fpga dsp; +Cc: linux-mips, jsun

On Sat, Jun 28, 2003 at 12:57:49PM +1000, fpga dsp wrote:
> Hi all,
>  
> I may ask a stupid question here but I have problem of calling any functions such as interruptible_sleep_on_timeout, sleep_on ... in a timer handler, the kernel just crash straight away in the function schedule(). Now I go and do a diff between kern/sched.c on i686 source and mipsel source. clearly , they are different. So the question is from kernel programming point of view, the bottom-half of interrupt handler is still considered interrupt handler? 

Correct.  You can't call those sleep functions from timer function.

Jun

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2003-06-30 17:00 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-06-28  2:57 schedule() and mipsel processor fpga dsp
2003-06-29 17:35 ` Ralf Baechle
2003-06-30 17:00 ` Jun Sun

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox