Hello Hans,
------>
I think it would be better to change this assertion into
a simple test, so that calling hal_interrupt_configure() with an
un-configurable interrupt vector just does nothing.
<-----
I dont't agree with this change. If I configure a system and do a
mistake setting up interrupt priorities then my only chance and a very
good way to catch this error is this assertion. If you silently drop
this failure just to make a test case happy then you may pass the test
but you will run into trouble with your real application.
Btw. the assertion I put into the code is wrong:
CYG_ASSERT(vector <= CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_EINT3 &&
vector >= CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_EINT0 , "Invalid vector");
should be:
CYG_ASSERT(vector <= CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_EINT3 ||
vector >= CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_EINT0 , "Invalid vector");
Hello Andrew, what do you think about the patch. Is it okay to remove
the assertion just to make test cases happy?
Kind regards, Uwe
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Dipl. Inf. (FH)
Uwe Kindler
Software Engineering
--
cetoni GmbH
Am Wiesenring 6
D-07554 Korbussen
Tel.: +49 (0) 36602 338 28
Fax: +49 (0) 36602 338 11
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.cetoni.de
