On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Robert Watson wrote:
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
I think getmicrotime relies on interrupts, while microtime doesn't.
See "man microtime".
You're right, but that doesn't make things better :-). Some of the
tc_get_timecount() calls are safe in the DDB e
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Monday 03 August 2009 10:28:38 Ed Schouten wrote:
* Robert Watson wrote:
I'm a bit surprised the timed key repeat in this patch would work properly
in DDB, as microtime(9) relies on interrupts firing for updated
timestamps. The availability
On Monday 03 August 2009 10:28:38 Ed Schouten wrote:
> * Robert Watson wrote:
> > I'm a bit surprised the timed key repeat in this patch would work
> > properly in DDB, as microtime(9) relies on interrupts firing for
> > updated timestamps. The availability of interrupts for polled input
> > cons
* Robert Watson wrote:
> I'm a bit surprised the timed key repeat in this patch would work
> properly in DDB, as microtime(9) relies on interrupts firing for
> updated timestamps. The availability of interrupts for polled input
> consumers varies, but in general this is not true (for example) at
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Here is a patch to address the problem. Please test and report back. Works
fine over here.
http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=166957
MD5 (ukbd.c.diff) = 1e3c143942593b0ed4617d306a9d2ee2
cd /usr/src/sys/dev/usb/input/
cat ukbd.c.diff | patch
Hi,
Here is a patch to address the problem. Please test and report back. Works
fine over here.
http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=166957
MD5 (ukbd.c.diff) = 1e3c143942593b0ed4617d306a9d2ee2
cd /usr/src/sys/dev/usb/input/
cat ukbd.c.diff | patch
--HPS
--- ukbd.c 2009-08-02 16:28:40.000
