delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Thu, 14 Oct 1999 10:43:52 +0200 (IST) |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
To: | Paolo Gava <pgava AT etrone DOT com DOT au> |
cc: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: critical section again |
In-Reply-To: | <Tf%M3.174$Po4.5800@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.991014104313.26124I-100000@is> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Paolo Gava wrote: > When I call sys_call() the interrupt should be disable, but when I print > ulCount, I see that it is increased. I think that's because your timer handler enables the interrupts: > popal > popw %gs > popw %fs > popw %es > popw %ds > > sti > iret If you are counting on the fact that once you call disable() your handler won't be called at all, don't: Windows has its own ideas about that...
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |