Da Zheng, le Wed 12 May 2010 17:36:36 +0800, a écrit :
> On 10-5-12 上午6:03, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > Da Zheng, le Sat 08 May 2010 23:19:08 +0800, a écrit :
> >> A stupid question: when disable_irq_nosync is called, IRQ_DISABLED is set
> >> in the
> >> irq descriptor in the Linux kernel and the c
On 10-5-12 上午6:03, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Da Zheng, le Sat 08 May 2010 23:19:08 +0800, a écrit :
>> A stupid question: when disable_irq_nosync is called, IRQ_DISABLED is set in
>> the
>> irq descriptor in the Linux kernel and the corresponding hardirq line should
>> be
>> masked as well (at lea
Da Zheng, le Sat 08 May 2010 23:19:08 +0800, a écrit :
> A stupid question: when disable_irq_nosync is called, IRQ_DISABLED is set in
> the
> irq descriptor in the Linux kernel and the corresponding hardirq line should
> be
> masked as well (at least, it seems the kernel for x86 does so).
AIUI,
On 10-5-7 下午4:31, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Da Zheng, le Fri 07 May 2010 00:53:20 +0800, a écrit :
>> In ne2k-pci, an example in DDE Linux26, when a packet is transmitted by the
>> driver, disable_irq_nosync_lockdep_irqsave() is called to disable irq. Then
>> it
>> triggers a send and c
Hello,
Da Zheng, le Fri 07 May 2010 00:53:20 +0800, a écrit :
> In ne2k-pci, an example in DDE Linux26, when a packet is transmitted by the
> driver, disable_irq_nosync_lockdep_irqsave() is called to disable irq. Then it
> triggers a send and calls enable_irq_lockdep_irqrestore().
> Should the in
On 10-5-7 上午7:51, olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 12:53:20AM +0800, Da Zheng wrote:
>
>> disable_irq_nosync_lockdep_irqsave is exactly the same as
>> disable_irq_nosync when there isn't CONFIG_LOCKDEP. It seems to me
>> that ne2k-pci shouldn't call it in the first
Hi,
On Fri, May 07, 2010 at 12:53:20AM +0800, Da Zheng wrote:
> disable_irq_nosync_lockdep_irqsave is exactly the same as
> disable_irq_nosync when there isn't CONFIG_LOCKDEP. It seems to me
> that ne2k-pci shouldn't call it in the first place when transmitting
> packets, but Linux drivers should
Hello,
In DDE Linux26, the interrupt is ignored when an interrupt line is disabled,
i.e., the handle_irq field of ddekit_irq_ctrl is 0.
In ne2k-pci, an example in DDE Linux26, when a packet is transmitted by the
driver, disable_irq_nosync_lockdep_irqsave() is called to disable irq. Then it
trigge
