Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:24:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:24:17 -0400 Received: from smtp-rt-9.wanadoo.fr ([193.252.19.55]:63646 "EHLO alisier.wanadoo.fr") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 18:24:00 -0400 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: John Alvord Cc: Patrick Mochel , Subject: Re: [RFC] New Driver Model for 2.5 Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 00:23:44 +0200 Message-Id: <20011018222344.7467@smtp.wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: CTM PowerMail 3.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Maybe each driver could pass back a value indicating > >1) all done >2) N milliseconds more, please > >and you could keep calling until every driver says all done. The >all-done drivers would ignore any new interrupts. The Not-Yet drivers >could get the last few interrupts the need to complete. Of course >there would need to be an overall timeout. That would leave most of >the responsibility with the drivers... who know most of the true >requirements. Hrm... The interesting thing with this scheme is that it allows you to first block your queue, then let other driver do the same while your async IO completes, and then come back. Well... this could be an option to step "2" of my earlier proposal. This requires the device structure to keep track of which driver still wants to be called. It would only go to step 3 once all drivers have ack'ed step 2. Ben. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/