Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Niels Möller
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Peter has already written device drivers for embedded Linux, and actually > has a lot of experience on how to write device drivers portably (he is > actually giving a talk at FOSDEM about it, he announced this on this list). That's fine. Hurd require

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 06:48:01PM +0100, Niels Möller wrote: > I mean, one can start designing a framework and discuss for months > what's the best way of organizing things (see the networking > discussion we had a while back). And given the framework, one can > start writing drivers. That approac

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 08:11:47AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote: > Of course it will, but that doesn't mean that the Hurd repository is the > right place for them. Almost all of the code in the Hurd repository > (with some notable exceptions, like some CMU code that's still around > and the pfinet ser

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 06:09:27PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 02:28:52PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 09:08:40PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > > > > ioperm is supported in GNU Mach v2, that's what I implemented a year ago > > > > I trie

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Niels Möller
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > glad to hear. do you think it's pointful to implement it in Mach so we > can use interrupts instead of polling from now on? I haven't looked at all at Mach interrupt handling. If it's easy to implement intwait (did I understand you correctly that intwai

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 05:17:18PM +0100, Niels Möller wrote: > > Thinking about L4, I have no idea how ioperm should work, but intwait > should be fairly easy to implement, it just needs to wait for a > message from the kernel. glad to hear. do you think it's pointful to implement it in Mach so

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Robert Millan
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 02:28:52PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 09:08:40PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > > > ioperm is supported in GNU Mach v2, that's what I implemented a year ago > > I tried on GNUMach 2 and it failed with errno "Function not implemented".. looki

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 08:11:47AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote: > > There's also the side problem that the Linux kernel contains hundreds > (thousands?) of drivers that any given person isn't going to need. I > think that having the drivers in a separate repository (and then > possibly in a collecti

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Jeff Bailey
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 05:00:32PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > What's official? =) I suspect that drivers will never all be copyrighted > > to the FSF, since there's almost no value in that, which means that they > > should never wind up in the Hurd repository. On the other hand, having > > a

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Niels Möller
Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > well, from my tiny experience on writing a parallel port driver i can say > that userspace drivers for GNU are very portable. The only system resources > one needs (besides Hurd's fs libraries of course) is a working ioperm(), which > is a portable funct

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 04:43:45PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > You are aware of Peter Schrivjers intentions to write an L4 driver > framework? > > The problem is not writing one parallel port driver, or even one nic driver. > The problem is writing a good framework that allows a zillion of

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Robert Millan
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 07:40:56AM -0800, Jeff Bailey wrote: > > What's official? =) I suspect that drivers will never all be copyrighted > to the FSF, since there's almost no value in that, which means that they > should never wind up in the Hurd repository. On the other hand, having > a sub pro

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Jeff Bailey
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 03:40:22PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > is such work welcome then? i mean, if i write a decent driver will it be > included in the Hurd now or in a later term? > if there isn't interest at the moment i might consider creating a subproject > at savannah for userspace drive

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-06 Thread Robert Millan
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 03:06:17PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The question of user interrupt handlers: There is an interface, but I don't > > think it was ever tried in GNU Mach, so I don't know if that works or can be > > resurrected.

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-05 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 03:06:17PM -0800, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote: > Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The question of user interrupt handlers: There is an interface, but I don't > > think it was ever tried in GNU Mach, so I don't know if that works or can be > > resurrected.

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-05 Thread Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The question of user interrupt handlers: There is an interface, but I don't > think it was ever tried in GNU Mach, so I don't know if that works or can be > resurrected. In any case user space drivers are only interesting in a more > modern microkern

Re: userspace drivers

2003-02-03 Thread Robert Millan
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 09:08:40PM +0100, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 04:36:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > I've read the IO section and doesn't realy seem a useful interface. any plans > > to provide ioperm ()? > > ioperm is supported in GNU Mach v2, that's what I imple

Re: userspace drivers

2003-01-31 Thread Marcus Brinkmann
On Fri, Jan 31, 2003 at 04:36:35PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > I've read the IO section and doesn't realy seem a useful interface. any plans > to provide ioperm ()? ioperm is supported in GNU Mach v2, that's what I implemented a year ago (and I think it is in the GNU Mach manual, although I am n

Re: userspace drivers

2003-01-31 Thread Robert Millan
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 08:55:56AM +0100, Joachim Nilsson wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:25:14PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:09:02AM -0800, James Morrison wrote: > > > I don't believe any work is being done on userspace drivers. If you want to > > > look specif

Re: userspace drivers

2003-01-21 Thread Joachim Nilsson
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:25:14PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:09:02AM -0800, James Morrison wrote: > > I don't believe any work is being done on userspace drivers. If you want to > > look specifically mach user space drivers you can read the mach 3 Kernel > > Interfa

Re: userspace drivers

2003-01-20 Thread Robert Millan
On Mon, Jan 20, 2003 at 11:09:02AM -0800, James Morrison wrote: > > I don't believe any work is being done on userspace drivers. If you want to > look specifically mach user space drivers you can read the mach 3 Kernel > Interface[1]. If you aren't specifically looking at mach drivers, perhaps

Re: userspace drivers

2003-01-20 Thread James Morrison
--- Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi! > > I'd like to play a bit with userspace drivers, but i have some > doubts on the interfaces: > > - how can i wait for a hardware interruption in a userspace process? > - despite it's not necessary due to a well-known bug, how > can i ask