Re: Raise IRQL or clear interrupt

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

cli is only local to the current processor. this will not prevent other processors from running code or processing interrupts

d

--
Please do not send e-mail directly to this alias. this alias is for
newsgroup purposes only.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


"Pavel A." <pavel_a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:OGNfd%23oFJHA.5036@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
frefire wrote:
Yes I know I am on my own, but my question was to choose a way to prevent from context switches. Raise IRQL or cli, which is better, and why?

Maybe cli. It's hard to tell without knowing why you're doing this.
All one could see for now is that you're doing something weird, and get
a weird result. This is expected and not interesting.
Can you tell us an interesting story, so we'd became more
motivated to help you.

--PA



"Pavel A." <pavel_a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ??????:%23kYT9KeFJHA.5572@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your self made ISR is not properly linked to the operating system,
so the IRQL is not updated and other things may be not in sync.
If you want to call other OS services from this ISR, you're up to your own.

--PA


"frefire" <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:OE05CWbFJHA.4176@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yes it does run on PASSIVE_LEVEL, cuz it is not a standard ISR provided by Windows. I wrote my own code to operate IDT of cpu to enable some debug support. When my interrupt routine is called, I can see that IRQL is PASSIVE_LEVEL.


"Alexander Grigoriev" <alegr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> дÈëÏûÏ¢ÐÂÎÅ:OdLX$QbFJHA.1456@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
ISR's don't run on PASSIVE_LEVEL. You're mistaking something.

What you mean by "The interrupt context have an IRQL of PASSIVE_LEVEL"?

"frefire" <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:u6QWB%23aFJHA.768@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I have to handle a interrupt of cpu. During the process of interrupt(ISR), context switches must NOT happen. The interrupt context have an IRQL of PASSIVE_LEVEL. So what can I do? Raising the IRQL or cli? (note: this program works on a multi-processor system.

Thanks.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Raise IRQL or clear interrupt
    ... There is a feature supported by Intel CPU called "Last Branch Recording", ... we can choose an interrupt ... handling of the interrupt, context switches must not happen, for "LBR" ... Raise IRQL or cli, which is better, and why? ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
  • Re: Raise IRQL or clear interrupt
    ... When interrupt handler is entered, "interrupt enable" flag is cleared in the ... This feature stores branch info in a buffer in non-paged memory. ... I found the new interrupt having a IRQL of PASSIVE_LEVEL. ... during the handling of the interrupt, context switches must not happen, ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
  • Re: Raise IRQL or clear interrupt
    ... from context switches. ... Raise IRQL or cli, which is better, and why? ... What you mean by "The interrupt context have an IRQL of ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
  • Re: Raise IRQL or clear interrupt
    ... Raise IRQL or cli, which is better, and why? ... "frefire" wrote in message ... context switches must NOT happen. ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
  • Re: Raise IRQL or clear interrupt
    ... Raise IRQL or cli, which is better, and why? ... What you mean by "The interrupt context have an IRQL of PASSIVE_LEVEL"? ... context switches must NOT happen. ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)