From owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Tue Oct 31 11:52:41 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) id LAA27490;
	Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:52:41 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp (shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp [133.30.50.200])
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA27485
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:52:41 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from takawata@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp)
Received: from shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA04640
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:52:49 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from takawata@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp)
Message-Id: <200010310252.LAA04640@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp>
To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 30 Oct 2000 14:01:12 PST."
             <200010302201.e9UM1CF17960@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:52:49 +0900
From: Takanori Watanabe <takawata@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp>
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: list
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+000315
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 894
Subject: [acpi-jp 894] Re: GPE handler directly invocation. 
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
X-Originator: takawata@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp

In message <200010302201.e9UM1CF17960@mass.osd.bsdi.com>, Mike Smith $B$5$s$$$o$/(B
:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I want to use GPE interrupt directly ,not queued one, 
>> in installed GPE handler to use interrupt Embedded controller reading/writin
>g.
>> 
>> So I wrote this patch, is it OK?
>> This is contained in my previous post,And,with the patchset,
>> Embedded controller workes without performance loss.(though 
>> the execution itself is a bit slow,But it is not serious problem.)
>
>Just so you know, I got your previous post and it's in my queue.  Testing 
>for the 4.2 release and recovering from two colds in a row is making me a 
>bit slow though, sorry.

I looked CURRENT at yesterday and it is not so heavy load to use 
EC and fatal things(like system stall) did not occur when EC access failed.
I think that is because SWI is spilited into taskqueue, clock
(normal process scheduling),net ,cam,tty and vm. 
So the reason of the code is now resolved.(Taskqueue thread can be sleep now.)
Now I don't think my code is needed.(Especially own task queue)

Takanori Watanabe
<a href="http://www.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp/~takawata/key.html">
Public Key</a>
Key fingerprint =  2C 51 E2 78 2C E1 C5 2D  0F F1 20 A3 11 3A 62 2A 


