cvs commit: src/sys/dev/fxp if_fxp.c if_fxpvar.h

[John Baldwin]

On 29-Apr-2003 M. Warner Losh wrote:
> In message: <200304291800.h3TI0Dnr040242 at khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
>             Garrett Wollman <wollman at lcs.mit.edu> writes:
>: <<On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 11:55:24 -0600 (MDT), "M. Warner Losh" <imp at bsdimp.com> said:
>: 
>: > This likely means that some higher level of locking is necessary so
>: > that we can make sure that the interrupts can't happen once detach
>: > starts.
>: 
>: What am I missing here?  You can just disable interrupts in the
>: hardware first thing, while holding whatever lock the handler would
>: normally need to obtain, then force-terminate the handler thread if it
>: happens to be waiting for that lock after you're done tearing it down.
> 
> Shared interrupts mean that your ISR gets called, even if the card
> isn't the one doing the interrupting.  Also, you can't force terminate
> interrupt threads at this time.

Force-terminating the shared thread out from under other interrupt
handlers would probably be a bad thing.

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/