From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Nov 8 3:20: 3 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from peach.ocn.ne.jp (peach.ocn.ne.jp [210.145.254.87]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27E2C37B479 for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2000 03:19:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from newsguy.com (p14-dn02kiryunisiki.gunma.ocn.ne.jp [211.0.245.79]) by peach.ocn.ne.jp (8.9.1a/OCN/) with ESMTP id UAA15323; Wed, 8 Nov 2000 20:19:32 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <3A093663.23578211@newsguy.com> Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2000 20:17:55 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,pt-BR MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jacques Fourie Cc: Matt Dillon , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: kernel stack size? References: <20001108082135.21027.qmail@web3504.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jacques Fourie wrote: > > Would it be possible to pre-allocate a block of memory > and then "switch" stacks in my interrupt routine? This > may be far off, but my only other option is going > through ~10000 lines of code and examining all places > where local variables are declared. If I could somehow > do this in a different way, it would really help a > lot. Don't do that during interrupt. Queue the data to be processed by a kernel thread later. -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org capo@world.wide.bsdconspiracy.net He has been convicted of criminal possession of a clue with intent to distribute. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message