From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 20 17:18:26 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from detlev.UUCP (tex-96.camalott.com [208.229.74.96]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D1015335 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 17:18:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from joelh@gnu.org) Received: (from joelh@localhost) by detlev.UUCP (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA76924; Thu, 20 May 1999 19:17:43 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from joelh) To: Doug Rabson Cc: Peter Wemm , Tommy Hallgren , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Lazy SPLs References: From: Joel Ray Holveck Date: 20 May 1999 19:17:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: Doug Rabson's message of "Thu, 20 May 1999 20:25:45 +0100 (BST)" Message-ID: <86wvy3wa1l.fsf@detlev.UUCP> Lines: 18 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.3 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >>> "Lazy SPLs - The kernel no longer masks hardware events unless a >>> hardware event actually occurs, avoiding many expensive >>> operations." >> We've been doing it for as long as I can remember, at least as far >> back as 2.0.5, probably as far back as 1.x. > My earliest memory of it was as "Bruce's new interrupt code" for 386bsd. > It was part of the 386bsd patchkit I think. Why mask out the interrupts at all, instead of queuing them in handler level? joelh -- Joel Ray Holveck - joelh@gnu.org Fourth law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation - core dumped To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message