Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 9 Mar 2003 20:03:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 9 Mar 2003 20:03:04 -0500 Received: from modemcable092.130-200-24.mtl.mc.videotron.ca ([24.200.130.92]:52072 "EHLO montezuma.mastecende.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 9 Mar 2003 20:03:04 -0500 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 20:11:13 -0500 (EST) From: Zwane Mwaikambo X-X-Sender: zwane@montezuma.mastecende.com To: Robert Love cc: Linux Kernel , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] small fixes in brlock.h In-Reply-To: <1047255023.680.16.camel@phantasy.awol.org> Message-ID: References: <1047254400.680.10.camel@phantasy.awol.org> <1047255023.680.16.camel@phantasy.awol.org> 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 Content-Length: 845 Lines: 23 On Sun, 9 Mar 2003, Robert Love wrote: > Yep. Any interrupt, actually. > > Or the reschedule IPI on SMP systems. > > Kernel preemption off an interrupt is actually the most common (and the > ideal) place to preempt since an interrupt is usually what wakes up a > task off I/O and sets need_resched. So kernel preemption lets us > reschedule the higher priority task the moment the interrupt wakes it > up. Of course, if a lock is held, we have to wait till we drop it. Thanks for clearing that up, i'll probably need to relook at some of my code to be sure. Zwane -- function.linuxpower.ca - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" 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.tux.org/lkml/