Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2007 00:39:36 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel panic with pccard insert on recent 7.0 CURRENT Message-ID: <4674E538.90002@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <4674E3B4.5030103@u.washington.edu> References: <20070617024935.GU4602@funkthat.com> <20070616.211257.1585999818.imp@bsdimp.com> <20070617053746.GV4602@funkthat.com> <20070616.235659.-1947354616.imp@bsdimp.com> <20070617071303.GG12027@obelix.dsto.defence.gov.au> <4674E3B4.5030103@u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Cooper wrote:
> Wilkinson, Alex wrote:
>> 0n Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 11:56:59PM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote:
>> >Yes. I'm pretty sure that's wrong. All ISA and PC Card devices
>> use
>> >edge triggered interrupts. Also, it is inefficient for level
>> >triggered interrupts, since two interrupt sources on the same
>> >interrupt may trigger at about the same time...
>>
>> What is meant by "edge triggered interrupts" ?
>>
>> -aW
>>
> I'd assume 'edge triggered interrupts' mean interrupts which occur
> on some sort of clock edge, most likely dealing with a clock base
> required for setup, or predefined by the designers for some other reason.
> -Garrett
If the previous email was just noise (thought it might be after the
fact), think of "edge triggered interrupts" as something that was
designed to occur periodically in order to meet a precondition :).
Traditional interrupts can be asynchronous, whereas this edge
triggered interrupts are synchronous with a clock signal of some kind
(more like polling I think).
Hopefully that clarifies some things...
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4674E538.90002>