Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752009AbWCNHy6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 02:54:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752012AbWCNHy6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 02:54:58 -0500 Received: from fsmlabs.com ([168.103.115.128]:4257 "EHLO spamalot.fsmlabs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752009AbWCNHy4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2006 02:54:56 -0500 X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1142322891-6754-12-0 X-Barracuda-URL: http://10.0.1.244:8000/cgi-bin/mark.cgi Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:59:09 -0800 (PST) From: Zwane Mwaikambo To: Zachary Amsden cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Re: VMI Interface Proposal Documentation for I386, Part 5 Subject: Re: VMI Interface Proposal Documentation for I386, Part 5 In-Reply-To: <4415CE76.9030006@vmware.com> Message-ID: References: <4415CE76.9030006@vmware.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.00 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.00 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=1000.0 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=5.0 KILL_LEVEL=5.0 tests= X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.02, rules version 3.0.9728 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1787 Lines: 45 On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Zachary Amsden wrote: > PROCESSOR STATE CALLS > > This set of calls controls the online status of the processor. It > include interrupt control, reboot, halt, and shutdown functionality. > Future expansions may include deep sleep and hotplug CPU capabilities. > > VMI_DisableInterrupts > > VMICALL void VMI_DisableInterrupts(void); > > Disable maskable interrupts on the processor. > > Inputs: None > Outputs: None > Clobbers: Flags only > Segments: As this is both performance critical and likely to > be called from low level interrupt code, this call does not > require flat DS/ES segments, but uses the stack segment for > data access. Therefore only CS/SS must be well defined. > > VMI_EnableInterrupts > > VMICALL void VMI_EnableInterrupts(void); > > Enable maskable interrupts on the processor. Note that the > current implementation always will deliver any pending interrupts > on a call which enables interrupts, for compatibility with kernel > code which expects this behavior. Whether this should be required > is open for debate. Mind if i push this debate slightly forward? If we were to move the dispatch of pending interrupts elsewhere, where would that be? In particular, for a device which won't issue any more interrupts until it's previous interrupt is serviced. Perhaps injection at arbitrary points during runtime when interrupts are enabled? Zwane - 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/