mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* local_bh_disable vs. local_irq_disable: hierarchical?
@ 2002-03-02  1:32 Ethan Solomita
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Ethan Solomita @ 2002-03-02  1:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

	My straightforward question: If code has called local_irq_disable, does
this guarantee that a bottom half handler cannot run?

	I'm looking for a statement on semantics. I've tried to hunt
documentation in many forms. None of them imply that disabling irqs
would also disable bottom halves. It might just be me, but I have a
strong sense that disabling interrupts is a stronger statement than
disabling bottom halves.

	However I don't want to trust my instincts for this. I am looking for a
clear statement on the Linux definitions. And I am not asking this
question just to satisfy some curiosity -- there is an underlying
problem I'm hoping to put to rest.

	Thanks!
	-- Ethan

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2002-03-02  1:32 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-03-02  1:32 local_bh_disable vs. local_irq_disable: hierarchical? Ethan Solomita

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®