From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Mar 4 07:10:02 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA16747 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:10:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from heathers2.stdio.com (root@heathers2.stdio.com [199.89.192.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA16694 for ; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 07:09:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lile@stdio.com) Received: (from lile@localhost) by heathers2.stdio.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23198; Wed, 4 Mar 1998 09:50:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1998 09:50:29 -0500 (EST) From: "Larry S. Lile" To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Interrupts during probe/attach? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Is it possible to receive an interrupt from an adapter during probe/attach routines? I am working on a token ring driver and in order to initialize the card you have to latch/release/enable interrupts and wait... then the card will interrupt when it has finished. The problem is I can't seem to process an interrupt until all the other probe/attach routines finish. I have tried changing the spl level around my DELAY() but no interrupt. So are interrupts masked until later? or is DELAY() not interruptable? or am I doing something wrong? I can just poll the interrupt status register on the card if interrupts are masked during probe/attach but I just want to know if i'm doing something stupid. Larry Lile lile@stdio.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message