Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 12:59:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Simon Shapiro <Shimon@i-Connect.Net> To: Eivind Eklund <perhaps@yes.no> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: kernel config, spl*() and interrupt masks Message-ID: <XFMail.970921125919.Shimon@i-Connect.Net> In-Reply-To: <199709211748.TAA20869@bitbox.follo.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Eivind Eklund; On 21-Sep-97 you wrote: > > With the switch from processor interrupt levels to masks, is it still > useful to be able to specify the interrupt level (now mask) in the > kernel config file? Doesn't this just give the user one more way to > blow his foot off? For something e.g. config'ed as a tty in the config > file per default, spltty() will be used in the top half of that driver > anyway, and the user has no way to force it to still be blocked by > this call. > > And while we're at it - I've had to have a device driver blocked by > both spltty() and splimp() - is there a better/more correct way to do > this than having the driver call INTRMASK() on both tty_imask and > net_imask? This method seem like quite a nasty hack, relying on > things it shouldn't - but the driver has to be in both masks, as it > rely on structures in the generic parts of the kernel protected by > both spltty() and splimp(). > > Eivind. Yeah! I second that! Very annoying indeed. --- Sincerely Yours, (Sent on 21-Sep-97, 12:57:10 by XF-Mail) Simon Shapiro Atlas Telecom Senior Architect 14355 SW Allen Blvd., Suite 130 Beaverton OR 97005 Shimon@i-Connect.Net Voice: 503.643.5559, Emergency: 503.799.2313
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.970921125919.Shimon>