[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lwip-users] Are sys_arch_protect/unprotect required to nest?

From: Grant Edwards
Subject: Re: [lwip-users] Are sys_arch_protect/unprotect required to nest?
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 18:33:15 -0000 (UTC)
User-agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)

On 2021-11-15, Ajay Bhargav via lwip-users <lwip-users@nongnu.org> wrote:

> No, I am not assuming mutext required to be nested either.

but I thought sys_arch_protect/unprotect are required to nest?

> Infact my implementation had only simple lock unlock only. And as
> far as I know, lwip do not use nesting of lock, as its obvious that
> not all system support recursion.

> And lev is usually common return value of isr flags when disable_irq or
> enter_critical is called in most systems and is not a mandatory requirement
> either. Based on your implementation, You may simply return a 0 in protect
> and not use lev in unprotect at all.

So protect/unprotect are not required to nest?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]