[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Looking at the code, I don't see any places where "current" is not valid. > Got some examples? It's not that its invalid, it just doesn't make much sense. It points to whatever task happened to be running when the interrupt happened. So any attempt to access it is 99% likely to be a bug. > BTW: there is an implicit reference to "current" in smp_processor_id. Yes, on architectures that use current->processor that is an exception to the rule. After all, you know for sure that you're still on the same CPU as the task currently running. -Mitch - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Calling current() from interrupt context Kenn Humborg
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt context Jamie Lokier
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt context yodaiken
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt contex... Mitchell Blank Jr
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt co... yodaiken
- Re: Calling current() from interru... Mitchell Blank Jr
- Re: Calling current() from int... Ralf Baechle
- Re: Calling current() from interru... Ralf Baechle
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt co... John Levon
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt contex... Jamie Lokier
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt co... yodaiken
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt co... Kenn Humborg
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt contex... Ralf Baechle
- Re: Calling current() from interrupt context Andi Kleen