From owner-freebsd-mobile Sun Feb 14 13:29:18 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id NAA11753 for freebsd-mobile-outgoing; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:29:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (castles146.castles.com [208.214.165.146]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA11748 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:29:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA05491; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:24:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199902142124.NAA05491@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Warner Losh cc: Mitsuru IWASAKI , Valentin Shopov , mobile@FreeBSD.ORG, Nate Williams Subject: Re: apm & current In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:02:06 MST." <199902142102.OAA32088@harmony.village.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:24:43 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > : Adding to this, I noticed many other problems in apm code, such as > : - Fixed segment description for APM. The limit granularity should be > : specified in bytes, not pages. > > This looks good. I curse myself for missing the patch here. The segment limits are only ever specified in bytes as far as I can tell; we should be using vm86 all the time to get the APM information now. > : - Try to limit the number of apm_bios_call() executing to only one > : at the same time, watching busy state made by previous call and > : waiting if necessary. > > I wonder how this can happen, but it couldn't hurt. It can't happen, until the SMP giant kernel lock goes away, and at that point it should be fixed to use a suitable SMP locking construct. Don't add any other code to obfuscate this. > : - Made apm_suspend() and apm_standby() be invoked by apm_timeout() in order to > : obtain stablities. > > What stabilities are these? I'm curious. Likewise. I'm not sure that hanging these off apm_timeout is bad, but I'm puzzled as to what this hopes to gain. It strikes me that this may result in pending disk I/O etc. which will be lost by the suspend/ standby. > : - Added adjustment for segment size limits informed by APM BIOS. Following > : patch for apm_init.S and make in /sys/i386/apm/apm_init/ to generate > : apm_init.inc are required if VM86 isn't enabled in your kernel. > > These look good to me. They're redundant; vm86 should be non-optional. -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message