Regarding threaded irq and normal irq

[sandeep kumar]

Hi peter,

>>we can immediately deduced that threaded IRQ handler is
>>sleepable/blocking-allowed, and therefore process context.

>>Correct?

Hmm..But when i tried to take a mutex lock in threaded_irq, it is throwing a
warning message
"BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context"... So i was wondering
which way it is..

Thank you,
Sandeep
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Peter Teoh <htmldeveloper at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 5:48 PM, sandeep kumar <coolsandyforyou at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > HI all,
> >
> > I want to know whether threaded_irq will be in interrupt context or
> process context.
> > I heard they replace workqueues. But i dont know which context they will
> be running in.
> >
> > Any furthur references where i get more info..
>
> Frankly I am not sure, but after reading Documentation/gpio.txt - where it
> says:
>
> Accessing such GPIOs requires a context which may sleep,  for example
> a threaded IRQ handler, and those accessors must be used instead of
> spinlock-safe accessors without the cansleep() name suffix.
>
> we can immediately deduced that threaded IRQ handler is
> sleepable/blocking-allowed, and therefore process context.
>
> Correct?
> >
> > --
> > With regards,
> > Sandeep Kumar Anantapalli,
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Kernelnewbies mailing list
> > Kernelnewbies at kernelnewbies.org
> > http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Peter Teoh
>



-- 
With regards,
Sandeep Kumar Anantapalli,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110906/4d8590e1/attachment.html