Date: Sat, 18 Nov 1995 18:14:25 +0100 (MET) From: J Wunsch <j@uriah.heep.sax.de> To: hm@altona.hamburg.com Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, hosokawa@mt.cs.keio.ac.jp Subject: Re: DELAY's in syscons Message-ID: <199511181714.SAA23460@uriah.heep.sax.de> In-Reply-To: <m0tGmXL-00001XC@ernie.altona.hamburg.com> from "Hellmuth Michaelis" at Nov 18, 95 01:38:27 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As Hellmuth Michaelis wrote: > > >From the keyboard of Bruce Evans: > > > DELAY(n) only delays n-20 usec on an infinitely fast machine so it > > shouldn't be called with n <= 20 unless the precise delay doesn't matter. > > Syscons and pcvt call it with delays <= 10 usec when the precise delay > > does matter. > > If not told otherwise, pcvt does NOT use DELAY() for exactly the reason > you just describe. DELAY() is supposed to be safer than the inb(0x84) hack. It uses the clock. (No, this is no longer the crude DELAY() macro 386BSD 0.1 has been so proud of. :-) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511181714.SAA23460>