On 1/12/06, Rajaram Suryanarayanan <rajaram_linux@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i think that depends on how your mouse is plugged to your pc .. COM, USB, PS2 ....
Please see below
Fawad Lateef <fawadlateef@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 1/12/06, Nauman Tahir wrote:My init_module contains just this
> On 1/11/06, Anupam Kapoor wrote:
> > on a single cpu system calling "local_irq_disable" should be sufficient. no ?
> >
> well
>
> void local_irq_save(unsigned long flags);
>
> may also be used. I would suggest Rajaram to observe the difference in
> the behaviour of both calls.
>
local_irq_disable and local_irq_save are identical, local_irq_save
actually saves the previous flags and then disable irqs whereas
local_irq_disable simply disables the interrupts on the current CPU
and previous flags are lost (CMIIW)
--
Fawad Lateef
--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ: http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/
int init_module(void)
{
long int flags;
printk(KERN_INFO "Hello World \n");
local_irq_disable();
// disable_irq(169);
}
When I inserted this module, nothing happened. But when I tried disable_irq(169), the eth0 network card stopped sending/receiving packets. So it means disable_irq() worked. But not local_irq_disable(). Why ?
Is it like when insmod process finishes, the kernel automatically reenables the interrupts ? If so why not for disable_irq() ?
Also can anybody let me know what is the IRQ number of the mouse ?
i think that depends on how your mouse is plugged to your pc .. COM, USB, PS2 ....
Thanks,
Rajaram.
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays, whatever.
