From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 19 23:51:21 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D94C16A41F; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:51:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (vc4-2-0-87.dsl.netrack.net [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EC7043D45; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:51:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1] (may be forged)) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j8JNmiB1027596; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:48:44 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:49:02 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20050919.174902.66273219.imp@bsdimp.com> To: scottl@samsco.org From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <432ED22E.5010005@samsco.org> References: <20050919.083111.123550990.imp@bsdimp.com> <20050919145417.GE83017@ip.net.ua> <432ED22E.5010005@samsco.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0 (harmony.bsdimp.com [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 19 Sep 2005 17:48:45 -0600 (MDT) Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, ru@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/ed if_ed.c if_ed_pccard.c if_edvar.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 23:51:21 -0000 In message: <432ED22E.5010005@samsco.org> Scott Long writes: : Ruslan Ermilov wrote: : > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 08:31:11AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote: : > : >>In message: <20050919054051.GB65954@ip.net.ua> : >> Ruslan Ermilov writes: : >>: About the commonality... Usually foo_stop() (which is called first in : >>: foo_detach() if you were talking about the detach) disables interrupts, : >>: so foo_intr() doesn't usually happen. From reading the code, I see the : >>: same holds true for ed(4). : >> : >>Wrong. Foo_intr() does still happen because other devices can : >>generate interrupts... : >> : > : > Ah, you're right, I missed this bit. :-) : > : : Shared interrupts are only slightly less of an abomination as shared : ithreads =-) Sadly, shared interrupts are a fact of life in the x86 world. And on platforms that support pci to pccard/cardbus bridges, there will always be sharing of interrupts due to the architecture of the YENTA bridges... Warner