[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] SIGNAL or INTERRUPT ?!

From: Joerg Wunsch
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] SIGNAL or INTERRUPT ?!
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 23:39:55 +0200 (MET DST)

Vincent Trouilliez <address@hidden> wrote:

> But for the life of me, I can't see anywhere in the rest of the
> interrupt section, a single word to explain what the difference
> between the two macros is, and their respective purpose/goal.

You can't?

Hmm, just compare the descriptions of both macros.

Anyway, mind the saying: ``If you don't know whether you need to use
SIGNAL or INTERRUPT, for sure, you want SIGNAL.''

Actually, due to the trouble it's causing to the unsuspecting, we
might even drop the INTERRUPT macro completely in a future version.
As we're close to release version 1.4, it's probably a good time to
start deprecating it right now.  The underlying functionality, where
you can have an ISR that has interrupts re-enabled right in the
prologue to minimize the impact on further nested interrupts, will be
retained though, but you'll have to explicitly use __attribute__
((__interrupt__)) then.

cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]