From owner-svn-src-user@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 29 09:05:48 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-user@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36CA1106566B for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:05:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gx0-f182.google.com (mail-gx0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE77E8FC14 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ggeq3 with SMTP id q3so36465gge.13 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 02:05:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=ojJHfsX7peZo193gnhYMsxemXV65tkIbopf0kPJQuVU=; b=Yu3VHJlbBgZXZpg7d6h3VOTqhI4tOF91Sm6W+D4EANs6Znxj/1Qp8gKAfJtp09WUQV KFd5V3gQD3b5299079Y7OigXKfLr1p+49cZosVI8eOTYFvd0wtVGrcWR2a1I9swFrun8 6mEYaYMkvuDChWQpm9ved0Ae5v3y7Z/LL7WDY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.124.97 with SMTP id w61mr61611833yhh.106.1317285292637; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 01:34:52 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.236.111.42 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 01:34:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E84222F.7050101@FreeBSD.org> References: <201109290310.p8T3AgZO001901@svn.freebsd.org> <4E84222F.7050101@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 16:34:52 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: LCmOslX2KZhXFdSdSotU7YVx9xE Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: Alexander Motin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-user@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r225860 - user/adrian/if_ath_tx/sys/mips/mips X-BeenThere: svn-src-user@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the experimental " user" src tree" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:05:48 -0000 On 29 September 2011 15:45, Alexander Motin wrote: > I think that's not good to call intr_disable() before cpu_idleclock(). > cpu_idleclock() uses spin mutex to serialize timer hardware accesses, > which disables interrupts. When it enable them back, it will revert > effect of your intr_disable() also. .. wait. So spinlocks don't save/restore the interrupt state? They just enable/disable it? Adrian