From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Jan 18 14:38:50 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from tao.org.uk (genesis.tao.org.uk [194.242.131.94])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B8EAC37B401; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:38:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by tao.org.uk (Postfix, from userid 100)
	id 221933174; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:38:31 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:38:31 +0000
From: Josef Karthauser <joe@tao.org.uk>
To: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: stray irq 7
Message-ID: <20010118223831.J1349@tao.org.uk>
References: <5.0.0.25.0.20010118165305.02eb76a0@mail.etinc.com> <200101182245.f0IMjYQ01614@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <200101182245.f0IMjYQ01614@mass.osd.bsdi.com>; from msmith@FreeBSD.ORG on Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 02:45:34PM -0800
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 02:45:34PM -0800, Mike Smith wrote:
> > Ok, so why is this only a problem in FreeBSD 4.x, or better yet, since its 
> > a well known problem, why arent they handled more eloquently?
> 
> I have no idea why it only happens to you with 4.x; the code that does 
> that has been in place since the 2.x days.  There's no real way to be 
> more "eloquent" about it; you could just ignore them like everyone else 
> does, but that doesn't alert you to misbehaving hardware, which is 
> sometimes desirable.

At the risk of being dragged into this, I've see this kind of behaviour
on RELENG_3 also in the past.

Joe


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