From owner-freebsd-current Tue Mar 21 08:45:17 1995 Return-Path: current-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id IAA24868 for current-outgoing; Tue, 21 Mar 1995 08:45:17 -0800 Received: from cs.weber.edu (cs.weber.edu [137.190.16.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id IAA24862 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 1995 08:45:16 -0800 Received: by cs.weber.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1.1) id AA06839; Tue, 21 Mar 95 09:38:31 MST From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) Message-Id: <9503211638.AA06839@cs.weber.edu> Subject: Re: Sharing interrupts with PCI devices? To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Tue, 21 Mar 95 9:38:31 MST Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, current@FreeBSD.org, se@MI.Uni-Koeln.DE In-Reply-To: <199503211525.BAA19070@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Mar 22, 95 01:25:09 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4dev PL52] Sender: current-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > One or two here, one or two there ... I'm > looking at a cyclades intelligent serial > board and driver that is 25% slower than > an unintelligent 16450 board and 3 times > slower than an unintelligent 16550 board. > Perhaps it would be faster if cycles weren't > wasted here and there. [ ... ] > I think there should be separate interrupt > registration and dispatch, etc. for different > classes of interrupts. I can save a few usec > in the ISA handlers if they spec'ed to not > support level triggered interrupts. I agree with Bruce, but then I'm a computational nanosecond kinda guy from my Commodore 64 raster interrupt days... Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.