From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 19 14:58:59 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE4A016A41F; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:58:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B003543D45; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:58:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8JEwjJb025740; Mon, 19 Sep 2005 08:58:46 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <432ED22E.5010005@samsco.org> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 08:58:54 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.8) Gecko/20050615 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ruslan Ermilov References: <200509182051.j8IKpYGU073493@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050919054051.GB65954@ip.net.ua> <20050919.083111.123550990.imp@bsdimp.com> <20050919145417.GE83017@ip.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <20050919145417.GE83017@ip.net.ua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, "M. Warner Losh" Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/ed if_ed.c if_ed_pccard.c if_edvar.h X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:58:59 -0000 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 =-) Scott