From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 09:32:38 -0400
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <125aa93ce1c20a7853557a368e77b0ca@kw.quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <64a6fa23d8a01d86312954ab451692d0@terzarima.net>
References: <64a6fa23d8a01d86312954ab451692d0@terzarima.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] 9vx, kproc and *double sleep*
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 321f2a82-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> that's only because the clock interrupt handler directly or indirectly (eg,
> via sched) calls spllo, and other trap or interrupt handlers could do that.

wouldn't that be fatal with shared 8259 interrupts?

- erik