Date: Wed, 5 Apr 95 12:39:03 MDT From: terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Cc: peter@bonkers.taronga.com, phk@ref.tfs.com, freebsd-hackers@freefall.cdrom.com, uhclem@nemesis.lonestar.org Subject: Re: Suggestion on slow probing devices Message-ID: <9504051839.AA00795@cs.weber.edu> In-Reply-To: <199504051738.DAA26590@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Apr 6, 95 03:38:48 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >I'd say the right thing to do would be to get the timer flying and make > >a "HW-probe-attach" process... > > lkm'ed drivers will make this both easier and harder. Easier because they > will have an process context to sleep on so they won't need to call DELAY() > for long delays. Harder because they must leave the device in a safe state > before sleeping and because they must not call DELAY() for delays longer > than are acceptable in normal operation (perhaps 100usec max). Yay, kernel high resoloution timers and one-shots! Yay, kernel preemption and multithreading! Boo, work involved! Free Rah, Rah, Rah! Bee Rah, Rah, Rah! Ess Rah, Rah, Rah! Dee Rah, Rah, Rah! Free Bee Ess Dee Probe, Probe Probe! Yay, team! Terry Lambert terry@cs.weber.edu --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9504051839.AA00795>