From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765779AbXGXOqx (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:46:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752440AbXGXOqp (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:46:45 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:45725 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752271AbXGXOqp (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:46:45 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] LinuxPPS - definitive version From: David Woodhouse To: Rodolfo Giometti Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <20070724142050.GD4074@enneenne.com> References: <20070717180550.GA24759@enneenne.com> <1185197716.14697.244.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20070724080013.GA22171@gundam.enneenne.com> <1185284942.14697.319.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <20070724142050.GD4074@enneenne.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:46:42 +0100 Message-Id: <1185288402.14697.332.camel@pmac.infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.2 (2.10.2-2.fc7.dwmw2.1) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 16:20 +0200, Rodolfo Giometti wrote: > The problem is that we can have several PPS sources into a system and > all these sources will arise their IRQ line (quasi)simultaneously and > I don't wish a CPU may delay one of these IRQ handler due a spinlock > into the pps_event(). > > That's why I'm trying to avoid any lock into pps_event(). The spinlock really wouldn't be held for long. It really shouldn't be a problem, and it shouldn't hold up your timings at all. And presumably you'd have a _different_ spinlock for each source, so they wouldn't stomp on each other at all. -- dwmw2