Re: PATCH 2.4.0.10.3: pc_keyb and q40_keyb cleanup

From: Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com)
Date: Mon Oct 16 2000 - 20:31:42 EST

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Timer, bottomhalves (softirq) and tasklets (and softnet) are always
> recalled with irq enabled. So if it would be called by timer/tasklet/bhhandler
> it should use irq version of the spinlocks too if it needs to run with irq
> locally disabled.
>
> One thing you could safely change in keyboard_interrupt is to remove the save
> part of the spinlock by using spin_lock_irq (we don't need to save anything
> since keyboard_interrupt is only recalled as an irq handler).

I understand SA_INTERRUPT, my question in the previous e-mail was more
basic: keyboard_interrupt calls handle_kbd_event with local interrupts
disabled. Why are local interrupts disabled? 

-- 
Jeff Garzik                    | The difference between laziness and
Building 1024                  | prioritization is the end result.
MandrakeSoft                   |
-
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 : Mon Oct 23 2000 - 21:00:10 EST