On Thursday 24 August 2006 21:17, you wrote: > On Thursday 24 August 2006 21:59, Hamish wrote: > > I had a thought... Might be a random brain fart, or it might just use > > far too too much logic, or whatever... > > <snip> > > Congratulations. You've invented the multitasking scheduler :-). > Including real-time priority and blocking on I/O. If you don't believe > me, replace "commands" with "instructions" and re-read. >
Umm... Hopefully not... I was deliberately trying to keep away from doing that (Due to complexity meaning more logic). At least at this time anyway. What I'd envisioned was blocks of commands being non-interuutable (Apart from that n+1 priority level). User programs get to talk to the card at one priority. The X sever (Or whatever is actually managing the display. e.g. window manager as well I guess) gets to talk at a higher level. So user code can't starve the X server itself from doing what it needs to do. (Actually that implies the interrupt will save state & restore it properly rather than being used for just telllling the card to stop what it's doing). I'll put more in reply to tims longer email :) > That's not to say that it's a bad idea of course :-). > > Lourens
pgpxraiK1dVZi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
