On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041112214636.26498B-100000_at_fledge.watson.org> > Robert Watson <rwatson_at_freebsd.org> writes: > : > : On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > : > Our usb system supports soft interrupts, but we currently don't make > : > productive use of them. The following makes interrupts fast interrupts > : > and uses taskqueues to queue data to a SWI. > : > : It looks like INTR_FAST is spelt as INTR_MPSAFE in your patch. Did you > : mean instead to spell it INTR_FAST? > > Actually, I ment what the patch said, but the description was incorrect. > It should have just said MPSAFE interrupts, not FAST interrupts. Sounds good to me. Scott's comments on possibly wanting a non-task worker may well be valid, though. Or you can do what acpi and other components do: use the task queue mechanism but provide their own kernel thread. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert_at_fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee ResearchReceived on Fri Nov 12 2004 - 21:09:35 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:22 UTC