Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2002 14:50:12 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org> To: phk@critter.freebsd.dk Cc: winter@jurai.net, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: It is time to admit that removable devices exist Message-ID: <20020624.145012.32175932.imp@village.org> In-Reply-To: <83073.1024951336@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <20020624163116.J95270-100000@sasami.jurai.net> <83073.1024951336@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <83073.1024951336@critter.freebsd.dk>
Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> writes:
: When you eject a pccard, we may get in pccard-socket interrupt
: before it disappears but we may also not. Depending on the world+dog
: this interrupt me come before, during or after the relevant device
: driver enters its interrupt routine.
For ISA cards this is definitely true. Either the CSR happens first
or the card interrupt, depending on a lot of complex issues (including
the bridge generating interrupts in ways that are ill defined at
best). For PCI cards, where we have shared interrupts, we already
implement an interlock. We could implement one more layer of
indirection in the ISA case as well.
Still doesn't solve the detach issue (it is currently ambiguous: used
for both unload and for device has disappeared), which my proposal
solves nicely.
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020624.145012.32175932.imp>