Subject: Re: configure() with valid context
To: Jason Thorpe <email@example.com>
From: Eduardo E. Horvath <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/16/1999 15:07:27
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 09:53:26 +0200
> Ignatios Souvatzis <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > initclocks();
> > > +
> > > + /* Configure the system hardware. This will enable interrupts. */
> > > + configure();
> > >
> > > #ifdef SYSVSHM
> > > /* Initialize System V style shared memory. */
> > >
> > > ...essentially, this allows autoconfiguration to run in a valid thread
> > > context.
> > >
> > > Objections?
> > I don't remember... where are the battery backed clocks read?
> > After autoconfiguration?
> Yes, actually, I realized there is a slight bug in my patch when I tried to
> boot it on an Alpha :-)
> I've since moved the initclocks() call into configure(), immediately after
> cpu_configure() returns. So, those semantics are now preserved.
Looks more reasonable now. I don't think it should cause any great
Eduardo Horvath firstname.lastname@example.org
"I need to find a pithy new quote." -- me