On 4/23/07, Guennadi Liakhovetski <gl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, pradeep singh wrote: > On 4/23/07, Guennadi Liakhovetski <gl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This cannot be true. Lost interrupts are bad, and you'd get them all the > > time, so, nothing would work. > Right.That clears a lot of doubts. > But all the interrupts in the mean time are taken care by the PIC only > AFAIK.Am i right? The moment CPU is ready to accept the interrupts > again on the line, the inetrrupts are served. Yes, as long as these are different interrupts.
Means the interrupt disabled using local_irq_save() if received in this period of time will be kind of buffered by the PIC only and only will be delivered to the CPU the moment interrupt is enabled again.Right? I am a little confused.Can you please help? What would happen if the same interrupt which was disabled using local_irq_save() is recieved again before local_irq_restore()? It will be buffered at the PIC only, right? Or is it that it will be served?Just like any interrupt on other lines? Thank you ~psr
> Is my limited knowledge correct Guennadi? Very few people have unlimited knowledge...:-) Thanks Guennadi --------------------------------- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. DSA Daten- und Systemtechnik GmbH Pascalstr. 28 D-52076 Aachen Germany
-- play the game -- To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with "unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxx Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
