Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 13:57:03 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Guido van Rooij <guido@gvr.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: splFoo() question Message-ID: <200003202057.NAA17486@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:00:08 %2B0100." <20000320210008.A59405@gvr.gvr.org> References: <20000320210008.A59405@gvr.gvr.org> <200003182031.NAA97975@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000320210008.A59405@gvr.gvr.org> Guido van Rooij writes: : perhaps we need some mutex mechanism? Yes. Right now the mutex mechanism that we have is blocking of interrupts when the bit is set in the cpl. I guess I'm a little too close to the mechanism and need to step back. You are right that I'm asking for a call that is approximately "block my interrupt handler from running until I say it is ok." A more generalized mutex/locking scheme is needed so that I can just grab a mutex in my code and in my ISR and the right thing will just happen. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200003202057.NAA17486>