On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > There ought to be _some_ initializations that don't require interrupts?
> > Registering the file systems and network protocols, stuff like that?
>
> Give up on IDE, it is too broken.
Yeah S- Can the whole thing and 90% of all users of Linux?
Hi!
> There ought to be _some_ initializations that don't require interrupts?
> Registering the file systems and network protocols, stuff like that?
Give up on IDE, it is too broken.
You should get away with paralelising USB and SCSI scan.
Perhaps you can speed boot up with initrd+modules, pos
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> I don't get it.
> If you say that IDE disables interrupts during init, does that mean that
> it disables _all_ interrupts or just that you mask the IDE IRQs?
Yes, it is called probing.
You issue a command to the channel and hope that something res
Thus spake Andre Hedrick ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Some of the initialization can definitely be done in parallel, but there
> > are all sorts of special cases, like devices which turn off interrupts
> > during init (IDE), and other fun tricks... Some of the delays during
> > init are timing sensit
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Some of the initialization can definitely be done in parallel, but there
> are all sorts of special cases, like devices which turn off interrupts
> during init (IDE), and other fun tricks... Some of the delays during
> init are timing sensitive, where yo
Felix von Leitner wrote:
> If we split the initialization into one "trigger the reset" routine and
> one "do the rest" routine, we could interleave initializations by first
> calling all the reset routines, then doing some static initializations
> and then call all the second halves of the initial
6 matches
Mail list logo
