[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C22847F.80109@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 00:02:39 +0200
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
To: Hari LKML <hari.lkml@...il.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Help in understanding the tasklets
On 06/19/2010 08:36 PM, Hari LKML wrote:
> After reading some of the books and the codes here is my understanding
> about the tasklet_action function
>
> the function statrs some thing like this
>
> 1. If the tasklet is not running in another processor set the Bit
> TASKLET_STATE_RUN; <<if (tasklet_trylock(t))>>
> 2. clear the TASKLET_STATE_SCHED bit; <<if (!test_and_clear_bit(TASKLET_
> STATE_SCHED, &t->state))>>
> 3. start the tasklet <<( t->func(t->data))>>
>
>
> Now when the tasklets function is running and the same interrupt is
> raised again but now handled by a different processor (in a SMP
> system) the tasklet is now scheduled in a different processor (because
> the TASKLET_STATE_SCHED is already cleared in step 2)
> and there are every chance of the same type of taklet running
> concurently in different processors thus braking the promise that same
> types of tasklets do not ever run simultaniously.
>
> I think i have misunderstood one or the other concept so please
> correct me and help me in understanding the Linux Kernel code more
> clearly.
But tasklet_trylock will return 0 when t->func is running on another
processor already because of step 1. Thus the tasklet gets to the end of
the tasklet list and is tried again later.
--
js
--
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