Timo always says everything is correct.
Unfortunately this is not the case.
_disable and setting IRQL to PASSIVE_LEVEL makes no sense whatsoever. You
basically hacked the HAL to support a bug in KDBG. Good job.
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2011-11-19, at 6:50 AM, Cameron Gutman wrote:
_disable and setting IRQL to PASSIVE_LEVEL makes no sense whatsoever. You
basically hacked the HAL to support a bug in KDBG. Good job.
I gathered that what I was supporting was pretty nasty, but either way the
behavior that was going on was completely wrong. I'm fairly sure there are
I would like to ask our kernel gurus if this one is correct.
WBR,
Aleksey Bragin.
On 18.11.2011 22:53, cgut...@svn.reactos.org wrote:
Author: cgutman
Date: Fri Nov 18 18:53:41 2011
New Revision: 54418
URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=54418view=rev
Log:
[HALX86]
- Do not allow
I would like to ask our kernel gurus if this one is correct.
Timo says it is correct.
Let me also explain the problem that I fixed:
So basically, I asked Sylvain to help me test a patch for supporting PS/2
hotplugging. I had added an ASSERT(FALSE) in the ISR when we got the magic
packet
