Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 18:06:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 18:06:47 -0400 Received: from svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com ([24.136.46.5]:60936 "EHLO svr-ganmtc-appserv-mgmt.ncf.coxexpress.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 1 Sep 2002 18:06:47 -0400 Subject: Re: question on spinlocks From: Robert Love To: Oliver Neukum Cc: Thunder from the hill , Ralf Baechle , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200209020002.41381.oliver@neukum.name> References: <200209020002.41381.oliver@neukum.name> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.8 Date: 01 Sep 2002 18:11:12 -0400 Message-Id: <1030918273.12110.3126.camel@phantasy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1026 Lines: 33 On Sun, 2002-09-01 at 18:02, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > > > No; spin_lock_irqsave/spin_unlock_irqrestore and spin_lock/spin_unlock > > > have to be used in matching pairs. > > > > If it was his least problem! He'll run straight into a "schedule w/IRQs > > disabled" bug. > > OK, how do I drop an irqsave spinlock if I don't have flags? See my previous message. Do not do what you are trying to do. Dropping a lock and calling schedule is fine. Ditto with the interrupt part. But note: - interrupts will be reenabled when you reschedule and still enabled when your task is finally running again. - Since interrupts are going to magically restore, if you are worried about the state of interrupts previous to your function... you have a problem. OK? Robert Love - 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/