Re: interrupt handler

[george anzinger]

Robert Love wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 2002-08-23 at 12:45, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> 
> > On 23 Aug 2002, Robert Love wrote:
> > > Only the current interrupt handler is disabled... interrupts are
> > > normally ON.
> >
> > No. Check out irq.c, line 446. The interrupts are turned back on
> > only if the flag did not have SA_INTERRUPT set. Certainly most
> > requests for interrupt services within drivers have SA_INTERRUPT
> > set.
> 
> Sigh... SA_INTERRUPT is used only for fast interrupts.  Certainly most
> drivers do not have it (and most that do are probably from the way old
> days when we went through great pains to distinguish between fast and
> slow interrupt handlers).
> 
> Today, very few things should run with all interrupts disabled.  That is
> just dumb.  In fact, on this system, it seems only the timer interrupt
> sets SA_INTERRUPT...
> 
And THAT makes sense as most of the timer interrupt is
processed holding the write_lock() on xtime which would need
to be an irq lock otherwise.  If they were turned on the
system would have an additional interrupts on/off overhead.

>         Robert Love
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [e-mail]
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

-- 
George Anzinger   [e-mail]
High-res-timers: 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/
Preemption patch:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml