Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 19:24:26 +0700 (ALMST) From: Boris Popov <bp@butya.kz> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Anyone else seeing jumpy mice? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10005231918200.68370-100000@lion.butya.kz> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005231859060.485-100000@besplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 23 May 2000, Bruce Evans wrote: > The patch seems to have completely broken fast interrupts. > GET_FAST_INTR_LOCK is neither necessary nor sufficient as far as I can see. > The necessary and sufficient locking is done by COM_LOCK() in individual > drivers. The patch changed GET_FAST_INTR_LOCK from s_lock(&fast_intr_lock), > which does nothing very well, to `sti(); get_mplock(); cli();', which > essentially de-prioritizes "fast" interrupts from "higher than the highest" > (higher than clock interrupts which are nominally highest) to "lower than > the lowest" (lower than all normal interrupts, all software interrupts, > and all MP-unsafe syscalls). Yes, this explains problems with sio. > Untested fix: Thank you. It works and no crashes experienced yet. -- Boris Popov http://www.butya.kz/~bp/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.10005231918200.68370-100000>