Messages in this thread | | | From | "Johan Kullstam" <> | Subject | Re: PS/2 mouse latency was Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: [DATAPOINT] kernels and latencies | Date | 04 Jul 2000 20:49:34 -0400 |
| |
Richard Gooch <rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca> writes:
> Alan Cox writes: > > > > The PS/2 hardware requires delays, but it does not require that > > > > interrupts are off for the entire period to my knowledge. > > > > > > OK, but there's still the locking. We can't just have the interrupt > > > handler frob the controller while elsewhere we're poking it, can we? > > > > Indeed we cannot. We need to do locking but we need to do it a > > different way. > > Which leads to my other question: can we "ignore" the interrupt > (i.e. just update a flag somewhere) for later processing in a process > context? > > Or can we block the interrupt? And hope no-one else is sharing it...
ack! don't do that. i'm sharing it.
euler(jk)$ cat /proc/interrupts CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 0: 420552 415935 428857 433866 IO-APIC-edge timer 1: 1302 1517 1318 1443 IO-APIC-edge keyboard 2: 0 0 0 0 XT-PIC cascade 5: 0 1 0 2 IO-APIC-edge soundblaster 8: 1 0 0 0 IO-APIC-edge rtc 12: 29010 29277 29577 29866 IO-APIC-level eth1, PS/2 Mouse 13: 1 0 0 0 XT-PIC fpu 15: 9736 10520 9629 9741 IO-APIC-level sym53c8xx, sym53c8xx NMI: 0 ERR: 0
if only i could figure out how to un-share them. i've got plenty of interrupts to go around. silly pci bios...
-- J o h a n K u l l s t a m [kullstam@ne.mediaone.net] Don't Fear the Penguin!
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |