From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 30 13:12:02 1996 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id NAA19903 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:12:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from calvino.alaska.net (root@calvino.alaska.net [206.149.65.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id NAA19879 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:11:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from calvino.alaska.net (hmmm@calvino.alaska.net [206.149.65.3]) by calvino.alaska.net (8.8.0/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA29326 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:11:48 -0900 (AKST) Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:11:47 -0900 (AKST) From: hmmm To: freebsd-hackers Subject: Ints Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk this isn't particular to FreeBSD - but after searching - i don't know who else to ask! please reply via email - i am not currently a subscriber! Q: is there danger in servicing a lower priority pending interrupt while servicing the highest priority INT in the same ISR ? IE - are any interrupt functions/bits LATCHED - that may need to be cleaned up? for example - i have both COM ports tied to the same ISR - is there any danger in reading RxBuf1 (lower priority) while SERVICING an RxBuf2 INT? or - satisfying a TxBuf INT (lower priority) while taking care of RxBuf INT? OR - does eliminating any INTerrupt condition KILL all things related to that INTerrupt? thanks ahead of time ... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sleep: a sign a caffeine deprivation ... http://www.alaska.net/~hmmm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------