Re: New release 0.0.54

On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 03:26:52PM -0600, Roger Tucker wrote:
> 
> Thanks for your reply...
> 
> >> 
> >> You have to learn to walk before you can run...
> >> So I decided to start slow and learn, by just looking at insque().
> >> I don't think I understand what mycli() was trying to do.
> >
> >Seems you have understood it.
> 
> I couldn't figure out why you wrote mycli() over just using __cli().
> Could you give me the basic idea here?

It was a long time ago, so I am not sure.
Might have something to do with wanting to check whether the atomicity
was broke.

> >> So what is wrong with this:
> >So what do you think is wrong with it, apart from what you wrote?
> >(I tested it with CONFIG_VMS, and it booted).
> >(It may also work with uml (have not tested)).
> 
> I was just trying to understand why why not just use __save_flags(), __cli()
> and __restore_flags().

Maybe for debugging reasons?
Now we might as well use your code.

> Itanium also has no PAL code layer, so Itanium would be somewhat similar to
> what needs to be done
> on the IA-32 for interrupt handling and IPL, so we should copy that design

As you probably know, they did an unreleased i386 port some years ago,
so it can be done.
I have already got IPL in CPU$ and PCB$ (contains "HWPCB"), so that
is in right place.

> somewhat.  This routine is called sys$pal_insque() for Itanium. See

Seems we might do it as a system service, too?

> Do you have any more technical information on the VMS port to Itanium?

No, have not looked at it.

Regards,
Roar Thronæs