nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) (10/05/88)
In article <1905@van-bc.UUCP> sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) writes in part:
SysV allows the clock interrupt to take over the machine at a higher
priority level than (for example) the serial interrupts.
SCO places the Serial interrupts at the top allowing them to take priority
over virtually everything else in the system.
Which one do you think will loose more serial interrupts (i.e. they both do
but the numbers vary greatly)?
Um, aren't you talking about dropping characters? My original
question concerned dropping interrupts, i.e. never getting an
interrupt that should rightfully occur. Losing a serial character
because you failed to accept it before the next character arrived is
NOT what I was talking about.
I have had no trouble with dropping interrupts under MS-LOSS, so
I don't really think that it's the hardware, unless Un*x stresses the
chip by causing more interrupts (??).
--
--russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu])
To surrender is to remain in the hands of barbarians for the rest of my life.
To fight is to leave my bones exposed in the desert waste.