Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!agate!darkstar!ucscb.UCSC.EDU!mee
From: mee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Kevin Kahl)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Interrupting An Interrupt Chain
Summary: Not impossible to create a standard!
Message-ID: <2129@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Date: 27 Mar 90 11:37:07 GMT
References: <26909@ut-emx.UUCP> <322@pallas.athenanet.com>
Sender: usenet@darkstar.ucsc.edu
Reply-To: mee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Kevin Kahl)
Organization: UCSC Open Access
Lines: 23


In article <322@pallas.athenanet.com> dgl292@pallas.UUCP (Doug Lee) writes:

>Unfortunately for this idea, I have run into several situations in which
>it is necessary that the chain NOT be followed all the way down.  I am
>currently working on something which is obliged to stop TWO interrupts
				[=stuff deleted=]
>For an example, I believe [...a particular handler...]
>blocks INT 9 upon receiving its "hotkey" to prevent it from
>being seen by other programs.

Why not adopt a particular convention for each interrupt that has
applications where it is necessary to block the rest of the chain?
For example, why not have a global flag that is set when a TSR
detects its hotkey?  All subsequent programs which obey the convention
would then do anything that they needed to (except use the same hotkey)
and then pass control along.

>I agree with you in wanting some kind of management for TSRs;
Me too!

-Kevin Kahl
 mee@ucscb.ucsc.edu