On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:29:07 +0200 Mario Kleiner <mario.klei...@tuebingen.mpg.de> wrote:
> That said, maybe preempt_disable is no longer the optimal choice there > and there's some better way to achieve good protection against > interruptions of that bit of code? My knowledge here is a bit rusty, and > the intel kms drivers and rt stuff has changed quite a bit. If you set your code to a higher priority than other tasks (and interrupts) than it wont be preempted there. Unless of course it blocks on a lock, but even then, priority inheritance will take place and it still should be rather quick. (unless the holder of the lock is doing that strange polling). -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
