On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 09:57:50AM -0400, Albert Cranford wrote:
> @@ -121,12 +118,12 @@
> int timeout = 2;
>
> if (irq > 0) {
> - cli();
> + spin_lock_irq(&irq_driver_lock);
> if (pcf_pending == 0) {
> interruptible_sleep_on_timeout(&pcf_wait, timeout*HZ );
> } else
> pcf_pending = 0;
> - sti();
> + spin_unlock_irq(&irq_driver_lock);
In case you didn't get my previous message, sleeping with spinlocks held
is the perfect path to deadlock. Also, scheduling with interrupts disabled
is not a good idea. Unfortunately the code above does both.
--
Russell King (rmk@arm.linux.org.uk) The developer of ARM Linux
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/personal/aboutme.html
-
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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 15 2002 - 22:00:36 EST