From owner-freebsd-smp  Thu Oct  5 18:39: 0 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org
Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 96D6A37B503; Thu,  5 Oct 2000 18:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6])
	by rover.village.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e961csK02058;
	Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:38:55 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org)
Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id TAA03855; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:38:54 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <200010060138.TAA03855@harmony.village.org>
To: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>
Subject: Re: Releasing interrupts? 
Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, smp@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:08:13 PDT."
		<20001005160813.R58256@canonware.com> 
References: <20001005160813.R58256@canonware.com>  <XFMail.001005121431.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <200010051918.NAA01346@harmony.village.org> 
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 19:38:54 -0600
From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>
Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

In message <20001005160813.R58256@canonware.com> Jason Evans writes:
: Good to hear it.  With regard to thread cancellation, it's another example
: of a feature that, if used, usually indicates poor program design, so I
: hope that we don't find a need for kthread_cancel().

Even for the interrupt threads?  I'd think you'd want to kill them
when their reference count goes to zero.  It certainly looks weird in
the ps listing to see ed1 on irq 11 when you know you ejected the
card...

Warner


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message