> If you have a system newer than a 486SX, then npx interrupts shouldn't > be used for anything except to probe that not using them works.
Can i disable the FPU, by commenting it out in the kernel config file?? > It > is barely possible that a bug in turning off npx interrupts after the > probe results in one being delivered much later (there have been bugs > in this area). I have enclosed part of my code in splimp() and splx(). Is that possible, that it queues the npx interrupt and deliver it later?? If this is the case, what shall I do?? > > If it was a real npx interrupt, then the address of the FP instruction > that caused it should be in the FPU state in the kernel dump. The kernel dump, shows that a line which has a "CALL" to a particular function caused the FPU interrupt, which is so wierd and the function also doesnt have any FP instruction. How can a CALL to a fuction cause the FPU interrupt, when the argument to the function are two valid pointers ? And the kernel has called that function at least 1000 times, before it gave an interrupt. thanks a lot bruce -vaibhave _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
