Please don't answer in riddles. This page: https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rusty/kernel-locking/x157.htm... ...in particular says that timers are basically softirq's, and it therefore seems to imply the use of spin_lock_bh. Presumably what I didn't understand is that spin_lock_bh should be used in the user context, and a simple spin lock should be used in the timer because it is a softirq? Thanks, Nick
On Aug 11, 2015, at 7:10 PM, nick <xerofoify@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2015-08-11 10:01 PM, Nicholas Murphy wrote: So reading this:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rusty/kernel-locking/x137.htm...
…led me to believe that spin_lock_bh() was the correct primitive to use within a callback from a high resolution timer, but that didn’t work. Instead using spin_lock_irqsave() did work, however. Can someone explain why?
Thanks, Nick Think about where a timer's execution is handled when the timer's timeout is executed. Nick _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies