Re: loopback blockdev deadlocks -- explained?

From: Maciej W. Rozycki (macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl)
Date: Tue Apr 18 2000 - 10:30:53 EST

Next message: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: [RFC] automount based devfs replacement"
Previous message: Linda Walsh: "Re: Security in general (was Re: Proposal "LUID")"
In reply to: Mike Galbraith: "Re: loopback blockdev deadlocks -- explained?"
Next in thread: Tigran Aivazian: "Re: loopback blockdev deadlocks -- explained?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Mike Galbraith wrote:

> Thanks.. same thing I did here. (hmm.. methinks Maciej is right,
> but then again, why is APIC_DM_EXTINT a mask?)

It just happens the ExtINT delivery mode is encoded in such a way all
bits of the field are set to ones.

-- + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + +--------------------------------------------------------------+ + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available +

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Jeremy Fitzhardinge: "Re: [RFC] automount based devfs replacement"
Previous message: Linda Walsh: "Re: Security in general (was Re: Proposal "LUID")"
In reply to: Mike Galbraith: "Re: loopback blockdev deadlocks -- explained?"
Next in thread: Tigran Aivazian: "Re: loopback blockdev deadlocks -- explained?"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 23 2000 - 21:00:13 EST