From: "TeddyLam" <teddylam AT geocities DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Automatic EOI in DJGPP
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:04:11 +0800
Organization: IMS Netvigator
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <8sp1s3$2bh3@imsp212.netvigator.com>
References: <8sls17$6bk30 AT imsp212 DOT netvigator DOT com> <8smp19$iku$1 AT nets3 DOT rz DOT RWTH-Aachen DOT DE>
NNTP-Posting-Host: tswc3a023.netvigator.com
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Well... actually Yes :-)

Because I'm programming the PC as a Bit Error Rate tester. During the test,
I really
don't suppose the PC do any other jobs at all. I want it to be boot up in
clean DOS,
run the program for a long time, turn off all interrupts except the one I
use, save
all test faults into RAM (64M available :), then when the test finish, turn
on interrupts
again and save the information on hard-disk.

This tester have limitations, I think the highest bit rate I can do is about
50kbps. Enough
for me but too slow for others. But the good point is that it save me a lot
of money, and I
only need to send a program for others to perform the same test, instead of
asking them to
buy an expensive equipment. Since it use internal counters, the tester is
mobile when the
program is running on Laptop.

Hope that this can convince....

Teddy Lam


"Hans-Bernhard Broeker" <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de> wrote in message
news:8smp19$iku$1 AT nets3 DOT rz DOT RWTH-Aachen DOT DE...
> TeddyLam <teddylam AT geocities DOT com> wrote:
>
> > is only one interrupt exist during the test process, I want to improve
the
> > performance by configuring the 8259 PIC to enable the Automatic EOI mode
> > such that I dont need to issue EOI everytime my ISR is being called.
>
> I strongly doubt this can be done at all, from a user-level program.
> Your program may not particularly need the other interrupts, sure, but
> what about the rest of the operating system? Do you *really* want to
> shut off all HD, Floppy and other hardware IRQ services? For the whole
> system?
>
> I.e., I suspect the whole idea to be a bad one.
> --
> Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
> Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.