linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc1] add local_irq_enable() to cpu_idle()

To: Yoichi Yuasa <yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc1] add local_irq_enable() to cpu_idle()
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 02:43:19 +0000
Cc: "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <20050118111159.2b3651aa.yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20050118014958.1d9e484e.yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp> <41EBEEFA.6040701@mips.com> <20050118111159.2b3651aa.yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 11:11:59AM +0900, Yoichi Yuasa wrote:

> "Kevin D. Kissell" <kevink@mips.com> wrote:
> 
> > There have been times when having local_irq_enable() in my idle loop
> > would have prevented a hang in some of my experimental kernels, too,
> > but it's always been because I had screwed up somewhere else and
> > forgotten to re-enable interrupts.  Is there some good reason why
> > the kernel should end up in idle with interrupts turned off?
> 
> After call local_irq_disable(), rest_init()(in init/main.c) calls cpu_idle().

Indeed.  Was looking at a kernel with kdb which removes this line.

  Ralf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>