> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 1997 14:01:15 -0600 (MDT)
> From: Chris Torek <torek@BSDI.COM>
> Cc: bsalai@tmonline.com, mrg@eterna.com.au, port-sparc@NetBSD.ORG,
>         steveng@formail.formation.com
> Content-Length: 2204
> 
> >lower processor IPL during processing of level 14 interrupts ...
> 
> This is not a bad idea.  However, I would suggest lowering
> the priority to 11, rather than 10, so that clock code gets
> profiled.  It would anyway if you just forcibly lowered the
> priority, but you cannot: [...]

I too found the idea interesting, though I suspect we could accomplish
pretty much the same thing by just leaving stathz=0 on the sparc, so
that statclock() will be called from the normal clock interrupt on
level 10.  This means there would be no profiling interrupts in any
of the interrupt handlers for fd(11), zs(12), or audio(13)] but I
don't think we really WANT profiling interrupts during any of those.

This fix would be simple enough so it could go into this release.
Would anything important be lost with this approach?

Gordon