From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Rajat Jain <rajat.noida.india@gmail.com>
Cc: "Ajay Singh (ajaysi)" <ajaysi@cisco.com>,
anubhav rakshit <anubhavrocks@gmail.com>,
kernel mail <kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org>,
newbie <linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Need for a new spinlock API?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 09:51:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1174553507.1158.160.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b115cb5f0703212259i31baa281l5efc431d82cac8e7@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2007-03-22 at 11:29 +0530, Rajat Jain wrote:
> > The lock contention is between the process or another instance of same
> > ISR on other processor(say uP1) which are waiting for that same spinlock
> > to be released. They will have to wait till old ISR instance finishes on
> > processor (say uP0).
>
> No, by design there cannot be two instances of your ISR running on two
> seperate processes (since the interrupt is disabled on all processors
> untill the ISR returns).
but the USERCONTEXT on the other cpu ALSO uses this lock, right?
(Otherwise this entire discussion was moot already, that was your
initial premise)
--
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com
Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-22 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-21 3:53 Need for a new spinlock API? Rajat Jain
2007-03-21 7:32 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-03-21 18:59 ` anubhav rakshit
2007-03-21 21:03 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-03-21 23:07 ` Tzahi Fadida
2007-03-22 1:12 ` Rajat Jain
2007-03-22 4:17 ` Ajay Singh (ajaysi)
2007-03-22 4:33 ` Rajat Jain
2007-03-22 4:55 ` Ajay Singh (ajaysi)
2007-03-22 5:59 ` Rajat Jain
2007-03-22 8:51 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2007-03-22 8:50 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-04-04 3:26 ` Rajat Jain
2007-04-04 5:38 ` anubhav rakshit
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-04-04 3:50 GAggarwal
2007-04-04 5:10 ` Rajat Jain
2007-04-04 5:34 GAggarwal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1174553507.1158.160.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=ajaysi@cisco.com \
--cc=anubhavrocks@gmail.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org \
--cc=linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rajat.noida.india@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox