Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 14:04:14 -0400 (EDT) From: "Andrew R. Reiter" <arr@watson.org> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> Cc: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@fnop.net>, Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 120788 for review Message-ID: <20070608140348.A14510@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10706081100k4f1457f2g6a714d8c897dc395@mail.gmail.com> References: <200706021756.l52Huq9A049371@repoman.freebsd.org> <86myzeq67f.wl%rpaulo@fnop.net> <4666B730.9080908@FreeBSD.org> <200706081351.54281.jhb@freebsd.org> <3bbf2fe10706081100k4f1457f2g6a714d8c897dc395@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 8 Jun 2007, Attilio Rao wrote: > 2007/6/8, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>: >> On Wednesday 06 June 2007 09:31:28 am Attilio Rao wrote: >> > Rui Paulo wrote: >> > > >> > > If I'm not doing something wrong, I need to use spin locks on my >> > > interrupt handler, or else witness_checkorder will complain with >> > > "blockable sleep lock". >> > > >> > > Note that I'm using FILTERs. >> > >> > So you are doing this in the wrong way. >> > In order to use correctly filters, please note that the support for them >> > is compile time choosen, so you need to wrapper all filter specific >> > parts using INTR_FILTER compat macro. >> >> Actually, if you only use a filter and not an ithread handler, you can do >> that >> now w/o needing to have any #ifdef INTR_FILTER stuff. > > In the case your kernel doesn't use filters (!INTR_FILTER) and you > pass a filter, it is automatically mapped to work as a fast handler? > > Attilio > When this conversation is completed, can this be documented?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070608140348.A14510>