Re: [linux-kernel] Re: [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kernel and pcspkr driver

On 20-02-08 21:13, David P. Reed wrote: Actually, disparaging things as "one idiotic system" doesn't seem like a long-term thoughtful process - it's not even accurate. Whatever we think about systems using port 0x80, fact of the matter is that they do and outside of legacy stuff that isn't

Re: [linux-kernel] Re: [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kernel and pcspkr driver

Actually, disparaging things as "one idiotic system" doesn't seem like a long-term thoughtful process - it's not even accurate. There are more such systems that are running code today than the total number of 486 systems ever manufactured. The production rate is $1M/month. a) ENE chips are

Re: [linux-kernel] Re: [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kernel and pcspkr driver

Actually, disparaging things as one idiotic system doesn't seem like a long-term thoughtful process - it's not even accurate. There are more such systems that are running code today than the total number of 486 systems ever manufactured. The production rate is $1M/month. a) ENE chips are

Re: [linux-kernel] Re: [PATCH] x86: use explicit timing delay for pit accesses in kernel and pcspkr driver

On 20-02-08 21:13, David P. Reed wrote: Actually, disparaging things as one idiotic system doesn't seem like a long-term thoughtful process - it's not even accurate. Whatever we think about systems using port 0x80, fact of the matter is that they do and outside of legacy stuff that isn't