> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> org] On Behalf Of Ron Kreymborg
> Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 2:28 PM
> To: 'Marek Michalkiewicz'
> Cc: 'Joerg Wunsch'; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [avr-gcc-list] RE: Class Interrupts
>
> > The idea was not mine - based on msp430-gcc where the "interrupt"
> > function attribute expects the vector number as argument.
> >
> > Hope this helps,
> > Marek
>
> Therefore as a specification then: The intent of this patch is so an
> interrupt function for, say, a mega8 timer0 overflow can be
> declared as:
>
> ISR(TIMER2_OVF_vect) {
>
>
> Or even as:
>
> void __vector_9 (void)
> __attribute__ ((signal,used,externally_visible));
> void __vector_9 (void) {
>
>
> Or most importantly as:
>
> void MyTimer0OvfInt(void)
> __attribute__((signal,10,used,externally_visible));
> void MyTimer0OvfInt(void) {
>
> Where the number in the last case is, of course, taken
> directly from the
> Atmel vector table in the specification for the respective
> processor and
> adjusted as necessary by the compiler.
>
My only objection is that the number vector correspond to normal
avr-libc usage and NOT from the Atmel datasheet, where avr-libc usage is
zero-based and one off from the datasheet. I would rather the options
be:
void __vector_9 (void)
__attribute__ ((signal,used,externally_visible));
void __vector_9 (void) {
Or:
void MyTimer0OvfInt(void)
__attribute__((signal,9,used,externally_visible));
void MyTimer0OvfInt(void) {
If they are the same number, then it avoids confusion. I know it doesn't
match the datasheet, but we have already established the precedent, and
I would rather be internally consistent.
Eric Weddington
_______________________________________________
AVR-GCC-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/avr-gcc-list
