From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp10.clb.oleane.net (smtp10.clb.oleane.net [213.56.31.32]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0961B67B3C for ; Tue, 30 May 2006 19:45:39 +1000 (EST) From: "Laurent Lagrange" To: "'Thiago Galesi'" Subject: RE: Linux kernel thread with Linux 2.6.x Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 11:46:09 +0200 Message-ID: <000a01c683cd$e3f29ca0$5201a8c0@GEG2400> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" In-Reply-To: <82ecf08e0605291013t7bd1627bg92d13908b3d0b7b7@mail.gmail.com> Cc: linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, Thanks for your answer, but a tasklet runs in interrupt context (in_interrupt() != 0) so it doesn't support schedule() call included in "down" semaphore function. Any other idea ? Laurent. > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Thiago Galesi [mailto:thiagogalesi@gmail.com] > Envoyé : lun. 29 mai 2006 18:13 > À : Laurent Lagrange > Cc : linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org > Objet : Re: Linux kernel thread with Linux 2.6.x > > > > > > As the interrupt handler can't be scheduled, I have made a > kernel thread > > which waits forever on a semaphore. > > This semaphore is set when a received packet interrupt occured. > > You should look into tasklets for this. Not that your system is not > OK, but, as you said it, it's not fast enough. > > Note that you still have some limitations using tasklets, but it's > more flexible than Interrupt handlers. > >