On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 16:01, Fundu wrote: >> > 2) so is disable interrupts twice is a problem, or just >> enabling them after they are disabled (which sounds like >> how it should be) a problem. >> >> both are a problem. the non-state saving version cannot be >> used >> recursively nor in parallel to the state-saving version. > > Much clear now, Thanks Mike! > > here's a follow up question. > > what about Non maskable interrupts ? disabling interrupt won't have any effect on that right ? that really doesnt make sense by definition huh. non-maskable means they cant be masked. -mike -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
