Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 10:10:28 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@flamingo.McKusick.COM> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BUF/BIO roadmap. Message-ID: <38F35C84.2F1CF0FB@elischer.org> References: <200004110225.TAA26536@flamingo.McKusick.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kirk McKusick wrote:
>
> It is my understanding that the BSD/OS MP work will soon be
> considered for incorporation into FreeBSD. Part of that
> project will include the addition of interrupt threads.
> Assuming that they go in, it will not be necessary to have
> a devd process. Beyond that, I agree with Julians comments.
>
> Kirk
I posit that an in kernel devd might be a good abstraction, even in
the case of having blockable interrupts. It is possible that the
device that reports a new arrival, may want to generate more
interrupts (a 2nd drive on a scsi chain may be active) and not
be held up
waiting for probing of the ist drive to complete.
While having blockable interrupts would make the probing
provably safe, it may not have the characteristics we want.
There are other tasks that such a daemon can do, for example,
poll the floppy for media removal. (which can be done on PCs
without starting the motor).
--
__--_|\ Julian Elischer
/ \ julian@elischer.org
( OZ ) World tour 2000
---> X_.---._/ presently in: Perth
v
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?38F35C84.2F1CF0FB>