interrupt-handling | 易学教程

Interrupt an external method call in java Thread

阅读更多关于 Interrupt an external method call in java Thread

问题 My java program use an external method(i dont have the source code) that takes a while to finish so i have made the call to that method in a Thread class (in its run method). Now the problem is how do I stop the Thread instantly (not wait for the method to end) if user wants to exit program. When I call my Thread's interrupt method nothing happens, no interrupted exception before the external method is finished. I thought an interrupted exception could occur and be caught at the same time

How SCI - System Control Interrupt vector is defined?

阅读更多关于 How SCI - System Control Interrupt vector is defined?

问题 According to the ACPI spec, The FADT (Fixed ACPI Description Table) table contains a field that reports the SCI interrupt number to OS. The field is defined as below: I dumped the FADT table on an Intel x86 platform and see the SCI interrupt is associated with the number 9 : But according to the Intel Manual, 0-31 are reserved vectors for IA architecturally defined interrupts. Specifically, the 9 is defined as: So, according to the note, the 9 is not generated after I386 processor. So I guess

How SCI - System Control Interrupt vector is defined?

阅读更多关于 How SCI - System Control Interrupt vector is defined?

According to the ACPI spec, The FADT (Fixed ACPI Description Table) table contains a field that reports the SCI interrupt number to OS. The field is defined as below: I dumped the FADT table on an Intel x86 platform and see the SCI interrupt is associated with the number 9 : But according to the Intel Manual, 0-31 are reserved vectors for IA architecturally defined interrupts. Specifically, the 9 is defined as: So, according to the note, the 9 is not generated after I386 processor. So I guess that's why 9 can be salvaged for SCI. This can be seen as a x86-specific implementation of the ACPI

a custom interrupt handler for mpirun

阅读更多关于 a custom interrupt handler for mpirun

Apparently, mpirun uses a SIGINT handler which "forwards" the SIGINT signal to each of the processes it spawned. This means you can write an interrupt handler for your mpi-enabled code, execute mpirun -np 3 my-mpi-enabled-executable and then SIGINT will be raised for each of the three processes. Shortly after that, mpirun exits. This works fine when you have a small custom handler which only prints an error message and then exits. However , when your custom interrupt handler is doing a non-trivial job (e.g. doing serious computations or persisting data), the handler does not run to completion.

a custom interrupt handler for mpirun

阅读更多关于 a custom interrupt handler for mpirun

问题 Apparently, mpirun uses a SIGINT handler which "forwards" the SIGINT signal to each of the processes it spawned. This means you can write an interrupt handler for your mpi-enabled code, execute mpirun -np 3 my-mpi-enabled-executable and then SIGINT will be raised for each of the three processes. Shortly after that, mpirun exits. This works fine when you have a small custom handler which only prints an error message and then exits. However , when your custom interrupt handler is doing a non

poll() returns both, POLLPRI & POLLERR

阅读更多关于 poll() returns both, POLLPRI & POLLERR

问题 I started to get in C programming with Linux and embedded systems (router hardware and openwrt). I have got interupts on GPIOs enabled, using poll works ... nearly. I can use poll() and if i press the button to trigger the interrupt, poll() returns with a value > 0. So far so good. Now i try to use poll() on several GPIOs simultaniosly and therefor want to analyze the revents of every potential interrupt source. Allthough the interrupt seems to work, i get POLLPRI & POLLERR back and i do not

Are there any kernel tools available to measure interrupt latency with reasonable accuracy?

阅读更多关于 Are there any kernel tools available to measure interrupt latency with reasonable accuracy?

I am trying to measure the jitter in the Interrupt latency for variousLinux kernel ( with RT patch enabled etc). I know the best way is to use a oscilloscope to do this, by generating a interrupt with GPIO pin and toggling another GPIO pin in the interrupt service routine, but i was wondering whether there are any Linux kernel tools to do this, and may be i can do a comparison of the numbers. davidg A typical method would be to set up a high-precision clock (such as the CPU's cycle counter) to trigger an interrupt some random-but-known time in the future, and measure in the ISR the difference

Which stack is used by Interrupt Handler - Linux

阅读更多关于 Which stack is used by Interrupt Handler - Linux

问题 In a multitasking system when any hardware generates a interrupt to a particular CPU, where CPU can be performing either of below cases unless it is already serving a ISR: User mode process is executing on CPU Kernel mode process is executing on CPU Would like to know which stack is used by interrupt handler in above two situations and why ? 回答1: All interrupts are handled by kernel. That is done by interrupt handler written for that particular interrupt. For Interrupt handler there is IRQ

Are there any kernel tools available to measure interrupt latency with reasonable accuracy?

阅读更多关于 Are there any kernel tools available to measure interrupt latency with reasonable accuracy?

问题 I am trying to measure the jitter in the Interrupt latency for variousLinux kernel ( with RT patch enabled etc). I know the best way is to use a oscilloscope to do this, by generating a interrupt with GPIO pin and toggling another GPIO pin in the interrupt service routine, but i was wondering whether there are any Linux kernel tools to do this, and may be i can do a comparison of the numbers. 回答1: A typical method would be to set up a high-precision clock (such as the CPU's cycle counter) to

On x86, when the OS disables interrupts, do they vanish, or do they queue and 'wait' for interrupts to come back on?

阅读更多关于 On x86, when the OS disables interrupts, do they vanish, or do they queue and 'wait' for interrupts to come back on?

My platform is x86 and x86-64, on Windows. The point of the interrupt priority system is to have the highest priority interrupt beat out the others. To enforce this, I'm guessing that Windows will disable all interrupts of lower level completely, until the ISR for the higher-level interrupt is complete. But if the CPU isn't listening to interrupts, what happens? Do they just silently disappear? Or are they queued in hardware, waiting for interrupts to become enabled again? If they are stored, where? Are there limitations to how many can queue up? What happens if too many interrupts go