Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 15:03:40 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: peter@wemm.org, <mike@FreeBSD.ORG>, <kris@obsecurity.org>, <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Conflicting declarations for ffs() Message-ID: <20021021145811.N9804-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20021020.220345.111000843.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, M. Warner Losh wrote: > Most of the problem is that FreeBSD doesn't have an interface to inb, > etc that's defined in an approved header. Bruce says cpufunc.h isn't > it, but then doesn't define one. Others say that this is OK, but it > really isn't. There needs to be something where this is well > defined. Note, inb, et al, aren't i386 only, per se, because the > concept of doing I/O is present even on machines with only memory > mapped I/O. But defining a sane interface to it gets tricky... Something like bus-space is needed in general. This may be insane. inb() can can be supplied by applications using a whole 1 line of asm if they only need inb(). Bruce 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?20021021145811.N9804-100000>