Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: Various bug fixes and improvements - where to put?"
• Previous message: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: Battery issues (CONFIRMED!!!)"
• In reply to: [IDC]Dragon: "Re: Various bug fixes and improvements - where to put?"
• Next in thread: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: Various bug fixes and improvements - where to put?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

[IDC]Dragon wrote:
>>I don't understand what the intention in replacing cli() / sti()
>>by set_irq_level() really is. The comment says that cli() / sti()
>>are not safe.
>
>
> I didn't understand this either, and it seems I have not yet compiled this
> into the version I'm running, else I may have noticed the drag.
> They should be inline functions.

Yes, they should be inline.

The reason that cli()/sti() was unsafe is because they disregarded the
current interrupt level. The sti() function always set the interrupt
level to 0, which is a disaster if called from an interrupt, or when the
interrupt is already disabled, like when you nest the calls.

Linus

_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox

• Next message: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: Various bug fixes and improvements - where to put?"
• Previous message: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: Battery issues (CONFIRMED!!!)"
• In reply to: [IDC]Dragon: "Re: Various bug fixes and improvements - where to put?"
• Next in thread: Linus Nielsen Feltzing: "Re: Various bug fixes and improvements - where to put?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]