lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 08:01:16 +0530 From: "Rajat Jain" <rajat.noida.india@...il.com> To: "Manoj Awasthi" <lkml.manoj@...il.com> Cc: "Rik van Riel" <riel@...riel.com>, "Rick Brown" <rick.brown.3@...il.com>, kernelnewbies@...linux.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Spinlock query > > > You need to use spin_lock_irqsave() from process context. > > From the interrupt handler itself it doesn't hurt, but it > > shouldn't matter much since interrupt handlers should not > > get preempted. > > > but interrupt handlers run in interrupt context when interrupts are already > disabled. Is that correct ? > AFAIK the interrupt that the handler is serving is guaranteed to be disabled on all the processors. In addition, if the interrupt was registered with SA_INTERRUPT flag, all the interrupts will be disabled on the current processor. Regards, Rajat - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists