Date: Mon, 29 Nov 1999 00:21:56 -0700 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: new-bus@freebsd.org Subject: Interrupt irq activation question Message-ID: <199911290721.AAA90820@harmony.village.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In my pccard_nbk I turned on interrupts when the IRQ resource was activated. In my newconfig pccard code, I'd like to do the same thing. I notice that the NetBSD code base turns them on/off in its intr_establish/intr_disestablish routines, which basically map to our bus_intr_setup and bus_intr_teardown methods. It got me thinking. Do I want to do them in the activate phase, or later in the establish phase. The advantage of doing them in the activate phase is that devices like sio that try to probe for the interrupt used can activate the interrupt w/o registering an actual interrupt handler for the device and somehow check to see if that interrupt is responding. The advantage for doing them in the setup/teardown methods is that I suppose this violates POLA less and might result in fewer stray interrupts. Any opinions on the matter? I seem to recall that Doug Rabson once told me activate/deactivate was the architecturally pure way to do this. I cannot find his email that told me this, so I thought I'd ask here in an archived forum. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-new-bus" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911290721.AAA90820>