On 17-01-08 22:58, David Newall wrote:

quoted text
> Rene Herman wrote:

quoted text
>> Over the course of a 100 messages or so in this thread it's been
>> determined that the best course of action is to keep the out for ISA
>> and replace it with udelay() for chipset logic. Now go away. 
> 
> Rather than this incredible rudeness, why don't you direct your energy
> towards convincing Alan of this.  He's the hold-out.

No he isn't and that's why I'm rude -- everything needs to be repeated over 
and over and over again. Read the thread(s). You didn't limit your reply to 
chipset logic and Alan even already submitted patches to isolate the delay 
for the chipset logic (PIC and PIT that is) where the expectation is that a 
simple udelay() will suffice.

We've already talked about ISA bus speed, and how it's not in a sane sense 
portably determinable, we've already talked about kernel parameters, about 
udelay and it's usefulness in early boot, about how your rude "Junk I/O" is 
exactly what is needed for some ISA devices and so on...

In fact, we're blue in the face from talking about it. So say something 
useful or go away.

Rene
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/