Re: timer_bh behaviour incorrect for 2.2.13?

Ingo Molnar (mingo@chiara.csoma.elte.hu)
Thu, 9 Dec 1999 18:56:53 +0100 (CET)


On Thu, 9 Dec 1999 kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:

> You can borrow solution from softnet. It accumulates once ran softirqs
> to mask and exit only when all pending BHs are ran once.

yep, although i think this does not solve William's problem: if TIMER_BH
gets marked by a timer interrupt _after_ it has been run, then we miss the
event.

-- mingo

-
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/