> > > The only reason I added quantum, was that I stumbled on the round robin
> > > interval buglet. Initially added a fixed 100 ms per proc, and then
> > > decided how much I could explore this quantum idea while still trying to
> > > keep the code understandable.
> >
> > Which buglet? Should
Hi,
Sorry for slacking off earlier, I was trying to recharge myself with some time
off without looking at kernel code, and come back with a renewed focus.
> > > Regarding the choice of deriving quantum from the priority, are you sure
> > > the priorities are correct? Should we keep priorities?
Jason McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:20:16PM +0100, Larry Hynes wrote:
> > - Use "user's password" (instead of "users password") consistently
>
> agreed
>
> > - Change "to be read something like" to "to something like"
>
> i think it was probably intended to be "to read something
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:20:16PM +0100, Larry Hynes wrote:
> Hi
>
hi.
> - Use "user's password" (instead of "users password") consistently
agreed
> - Change "to be read something like" to "to something like"
i think it was probably intended to be "to read something like", which i
think read
Hi
- Use "user's password" (instead of "users password") consistently
- Change "to be read something like" to "to something like"
- Change "Be sure reset" to "Be sure to reset" (I'm not sure if line
length is an issue here, so I deleted the arguably superfluous "back"
from "reset these vales b
> On arm64, pci_intr_handle_t is a pointer to an opaque struct.
That's a subtle trap. How would someone realize the order is wrong...
Would it not be better if this was done like the other architectures,
where the pci_intr_handle_t is a structure, not a pointer.
On arm64, the pci subsystems see
To set up an interrupt handler for a PCI device, you need to do
something like this:
pci_intr_handle_t ih;
pci_intr_map(pa, &ih);
printf(": %s", pci_intr_string(pa->pa_pc, ih));
pci_intr_establish(pa->pa_pc, ih, ...);
On arm64, pci_intr_handle_t is a pointer to an opaque
In the situation you kill a client and it happens the cursor lands in
the root window no window has focus. Then you Alt-Tab to cycle and the
window which gets the pointer is not the last focused but the previous
one.
Index: client.c
This diff gives the commands beginning-of-buffer and end-of-buffer the
ability to take a numeric argument and move n/10th of the way from the
top or bottom of the current buffer respectively.
Any comments/testers/oks?
Mark
Index: basic.c
===
