yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
> Looking at the code, I don't see any places where "current" is not valid.
> Got some examples?
It's not that its invalid, it just doesn't make much sense. It points to
whatever task happened to be running when the interrupt happened. So
any attempt to access it is 99% likely to be a bug.
> BTW: there is an implicit reference to "current" in smp_processor_id.
Yes, on architectures that use current->processor that is an exception
to the rule. After all, you know for sure that you're still on the
same CPU as the task currently running.
-Mitch
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 15 2000 - 21:00:11 EST