Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!highspl!burris
From: burris@highspl (David Burris)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.3b1
Subject: Re: more on the HFC saga
Message-ID: <1991May28.035153.544@highspl>
Date: 28 May 91 03:51:53 GMT
References: <1991May23.003857.8878@blilly.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: Dave's Home PC
Lines: 26

From article <1991May23.003857.8878@blilly.UUCP>, by bruce@balilly (Bruce Lilly):
> OK (remember, this is speculation, not hard facts): According to the
> Device Driver Development Guide, the last driver to be installed has its
> interrupt service routine(s) placed at the beginning of the interrupt
> "chain". If one is using a combo board, with few other drivers, and if the
> cmb driver is last to be installed, it might result in somewhat better
> interrupt response than if there are many loadable drivers (particularly
> huge ones like the ether driver) with the cmb driver loaded early (so that
> its interrupt routine only gets characters after the other routines have
> been polled).  I'm not sure how the built-in driver for /dev/tty000 is
> linked into the interrupt service chain, but that might be another
> pertinent factor.
> 

I don't understand this and I invite you to enlighten me.

If we assume a steady stream of data and understand that all the
interrupt routines must be "polled" for each interrupt, where is the
time savings?


-- 
================================================================
David Burris					Aurora,Il.
burris@highspl		           ..!linac!highspl!burris
================================================================