In message: <20040715180854.GZ1626_at_green.homeunix.org> Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green_at_freebsd.org> writes: : This is what I have so far, but I'm not happy with it because it : seems like it would be so much nicer to increment a count on the : ithread's intrhand and drain any current interrupt out of the : ithread, but possibly making each interrupt a lot more expensive. I don't like this. And I don't understand the problem at all. If the device isn't there, we already handle it correctly. I think that it is a lot of code to handle an extremely rare case. I don't like taking out an sx lock on every single interrupt. Please do not commit this. Thanks. WarnerReceived on Sat Jul 17 2004 - 03:17:31 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:02 UTC