Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 25 Mar 2004 11:42:05 -0600
From:      "Wm. Daryl Hawkins" <dhawkins@tamu.edu>
To:        "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   RE: Intel i8xx watchdog driver 
Message-ID:  <3D0AE03BE5EFEC4DB04D42326CA218477D5102@spruce.ne.tamu.edu>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Yes.  The version for current hasn't seen as much testing as the version =
for stable.  I only have one or two test boxes with current on them, but =
it seems to be working just fine with watchdogd.

-- Daryl

-----Original Message-----
From: Poul-Henning Kamp [mailto:phk@phk.freebsd.dk]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 11:35 AM
To: Wm. Daryl Hawkins
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Intel i8xx watchdog driver=20


In message <3D0AE03BE5EFEC4DB04D42326CA218477D5101@spruce.ne.tamu.edu>, =
"Wm. Da
ryl Hawkins" writes:
>
>I've written a driver for the Intel i8xx TCO watchdog timer for
>both FreeBSD-CURRENT and FreeBSD-STABLE.=20

Is this written against the <sys/watchdog.h> API in -current ?

--=20
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe   =20
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by =
incompetence.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D0AE03BE5EFEC4DB04D42326CA218477D5102>