linux-kernel - Re: Why can't we sleep in an ISR?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a2ebde260705150158m45286bd6u5007be863b6ff791@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 May 2007 16:58:02 +0800
From:	"Dong Feng" <middle.fengdong@...il.com>
To:	"Learning Linux" <learninglinux4@...il.com>
Cc:	"pradeep singh" <2500.pradeep@...il.com>,
	"Bahadir Balban" <bahadir.balban@...il.com>,
	kernelnewbies@...linux.org, linux-newbie@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why can't we sleep in an ISR?

Yes, you are right in this regard. An interrupt handler does steal the
time slice from the interrupted process.

So now I think it is considered an acceptable deviation in calculating
the process run time as well as determine process scheduling because
an ISR should take very short time to return, in part as a consequence
of the rule that ISR should not sleep.


2007/5/15, Learning Linux <learninglinux4@...il.com>:
> > The interrupt handler's execution time will definitely defer the
> > execution of the process, but I think it does not steal the process's
> > time slice (the time_slice field not subtracted).
>
> It will definitely be substracted from the process's time slice.
> Because the timeslice is substracted in timer interrupt, and does not
> differenciate if the process is executing ISR or not.
>
-
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/