>"Michael L. VanLoon -- HeadCandy.com" writes:
>> I haven't found a machine yet where I need DUMMY_NOPS.  From my
>> experience, it is pretty much intended for ancient slow hardware, or
>> very badly designed slow hardware.

>You haven't found a machine where you NEED it or where you CANT USE
>IT?

Sorry.  I haven't yet found a machine where I need extra no-ops padded
around my I/O port accesses.  Meaning:

I haven't yet found a machine where I can't use DUMMY_NOPS.

Which brings up a point:  I think it's very confusingly named.  Maybe
it should be called SLOW_IO_PORT, and turned ON by default in generic
kernels, and turned OFF for people who have discovered they don't need
it.  I think that would make it much more clear.

Or, if you want to leave it where it's slow until you explicitely
build with the option, maybe call it FAST_IO_PORT.  Then you'd have to
build with that option to disable the NOP padding.

>You don't make that clear.

Yes, so I see. :-)  I got it backwards, even though I know exactly
what it does.  My point illustrated.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Michael L. VanLoon                                 michaelv@HeadCandy.com
        --<  Free your mind and your machine -- NetBSD free un*x  >--
    NetBSD working ports: 386+PC, Mac 68k, Amiga, Atari 68k, HP300, Sun3,
               Sun4/4c/4m, DEC MIPS, DEC Alpha, PC532, VAX...
    NetBSD ports in progress: PICA, others...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------