Subject: Re: intlock
To: YAMAMOTO Takashi <email@example.com>
From: Frank van der Linden <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 02/23/2004 14:31:41
On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 09:50:16PM +0900, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:
> consider an interrupt which was registered as IPL_SERIAL occurs when
> the current ipl is IPL_NONE.
> in this case, currently, kernel lock will be acquired unnecessarily.
Yeah, that's true.
Ok, since we'll need a similar construct for marking handlers MP safe
anyway, this is fine with me.