From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756747AbYJKP3S (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:29:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753966AbYJKP3H (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:29:07 -0400 Received: from mx39.mail.ru ([194.67.23.35]:54378 "EHLO mx39.mail.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754032AbYJKP3G (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Oct 2008 11:29:06 -0400 From: Andrey Borzenkov To: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: when spin_lock_irq (as opposed to spin_lock_irqsave) is appropriate? Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 19:29:01 +0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart8109259.0jDmupbRF4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200810111929.01927.arvidjaar@mail.ru> X-Spam: Not detected X-Mras: OK Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --nextPart8109259.0jDmupbRF4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Logically, one piece of kernel code has no way to know whether another piece of kernel code (or may be hard-/firmware) has disabled some interrupt line. So it looks like spin_lock_irq should not even exist, except may be for very specific cases (where we are sure no other piece of kernel code may run concurrently)? Sorry for stupid question, I an not actually a HW type of person ... --nextPart8109259.0jDmupbRF4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkjwxj0ACgkQR6LMutpd94xJNwCeJtUkO/fBjBdoOSbnGEYDMS94 KcEAn2Vs76+TUiGWn6xjdPyh0YDDQcHR =GjjW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart8109259.0jDmupbRF4--