Re: in_irq()

• Next message: Robert Love: "Re: [PATCH] deprecate use of bdflush()"
• Previous message: Robert Love: "Re: [PATCH] deprecate use of bdflush()"
• In reply to: Madhavi: "in_irq()"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Madhavi wrote:

>
> Hi
>
> I am using a UP system with CONFIG_SMP=y in .config with linux 2.4.19
> kernel.
>
> I have this piece of code:
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&some_lock, flags);
> in_irq();
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&some_lock, flags);
>
> I have read somewhere (I think its given in the Unreliable Guide to
> kernel locking) that in_irq() returns true when the interrupts
> are blocked. So, I was expecting in_irq() to return true here. But, it is
> returning 0 here.

I think it is intended to return true only if you are in an interrupt
context.... that is in the context of a iterrupt handler...

ciao

-- 
______/ Rossetti Davide   INFN - Roma I - APE group \______________
 pho +390649914507/412   web: http://apegate.roma1.infn.it/~rossetti
 fax +390649914423     email: davide.rossetti@roma1.infn.it        
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

• Next message: Robert Love: "Re: [PATCH] deprecate use of bdflush()"
• Previous message: Robert Love: "Re: [PATCH] deprecate use of bdflush()"
• In reply to: Madhavi: "in_irq()"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 07 2002 - 22:00:19 EST