Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>> If that is the case. In the normal kernel what would
>> the "the oops, we got an interrupt code do?"
>> I assume it would leave interrupts disabled when it returns?
>> Like we currently do with the delayed disable of normal interrupts?
>>
>
> Yeah, disable interrupts, and set a flag that the fake "sti" can test, and
> just return without doing anything.
>
> (You may or may not also need to do extra work to Ack the hardware
> interrupt etc, which may be irq-controller specific. Once the CPU has
> accepted the interrupt, you may not be able to just leave it dangling)
>
So it would be something like:
pda.intr_mask = 1; /* disable interrupts */
...
pda.intr_mask = 0; /* enable interrupts */
if (xchg(&pda.intr_pending, 0)) /* check pending */
asm("sti"); /* was pending; isr left cpu interrupts masked
*/
and in the interrupt handler:
if (pda.intr_mask) {
pda.intr_pending = 1;
regs->eflags &= ~IF;
maybe_ack_interrupt_controller();
iret
}
?
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
