> bishop@sekure.org (Augusto Cesar Radtke) writes:
>
> > The patch above it's to implement a better usage of spinlocks in misc
> > networking drivers, as Linus says in Documentation/spinlocks.txt you must
> > use the irq version of spinlocks in interrupt handlers. The patch try to
> > do this in some 3com cards and in Donald's skeleton.c (for future hackers
> > reference), but there many others drivers that I need to look in next
> > weeks.
>
> As far as I can see your patch adds local cli()s to the interrupt
> handlers. This doesn't make too much sense, because they're normally
> not reentrant (there will be no other interrupt for this device as long as
> this one isn't acked). It only prevents interrupts for other devices, which
> is bad for interrupt latency. So your change is unnecessary.
>
Sorry if it's my stupidy, but SMP machines can't cause interrupt
reentrants?
-- Augusto Cesar Radtke Sekure SDI http://www.sekure.org
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/