On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Scott Long wrote:
...
Bruce Evans wrote:
Er, SWIs are interrupts too. Trying to sleep in a SWI handler should
cause the same message. This commit uses the general taskqueue SWI
handler. taskqueue(9) implicitly says that only the taskqueue thread
handler can sleep (it gives malloc(M_WAITOK) as an example of something
that can only be done in thread context).
Bruce
Please trim quotes when replying.
You're right, but sleeping in SWI's has never been enforced. CAM relies on
it, for better or worse, and until that's fixed it's pointless to
start enforcing it.
CAM at least shoots only itself in the foot if its SWIs block. The
taskqueue SWIs are shared, so sleeping in them is like sleeping in a
timeout ISR (not quite as bad, since SWI_TQ* > SWI_CLOCK). Blocking
on Giant to enter a taskqueue SWISR would be like blocking on Giant
to enter a timeout ISR except it is handled better by having a
separate ISR for cases that need Giant.
Bruce
_______________________________________________
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
