From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 10:14:00 +1000 From: David Gibson To: linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org Subject: Re: __cli on 4xx - MSR:CE? Message-ID: <20020801001400.GM27711@zax> References: <1028054814.13540.131.camel@granite.austin.ibm.com> <3D46E96B.1020504@dslextreme.com> <20020731005244.GA27711@zax> <1028130543.13540.168.camel@granite.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1028130543.13540.168.camel@granite.austin.ibm.com> Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Wed, Jul 31, 2002 at 10:49:02AM -0500, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > > On Tue, 2002-07-30 at 19:52, David Gibson wrote: > > > > If critical interrupts are disabled everywhere that normal interrupts > > are disabled, there seems little point in having them. > > Sure, I understand that. Will there then be a "__crit_cli" for when you > really don't want exceptions of any kind? And __save_and_crit_cli ? I think that has to be up to whoever first implements a real system with critical interrupts. -- David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a david@gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and | wrong. http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/