> *To:* Jeff Haran; kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: Kernelnewbies Digest, Vol 44, Issue 51
>
>
>
> Hi Jeff,
>
>yes, your guess is correct. The place i checked in_interrupt()
> was a region before which a call to spin_lock_bh() was made.
>
> So w
2014 at 9:54 PM, Jeff Haran wrote:
>
>
> *From:* kernelnewbies-boun...@kernelnewbies.org [mailto:
> kernelnewbies-boun...@kernelnewbies.org] *On Behalf Of *Vishwas Srivastava
> *Sent:* Saturday, July 26, 2014 10:07 AM
> *To:* kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
> *Subject:* R
From: kernelnewbies-boun...@kernelnewbies.org
[mailto:kernelnewbies-boun...@kernelnewbies.org] On Behalf Of Vishwas Srivastava
Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2014 10:07 AM
To: kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
Subject: Re: Kernelnewbies Digest, Vol 44, Issue 51
Hi All,
I have a doubt
Hi All,
I have a doubt regarding the threaded interrupt handing
mechanism.
what is the kernel context of execution while executing interrupt thread.
if i check for macro
in_irq() or in_interrupt() withing handler thread , my understanding is
that they both are going to return me 0 (since
