2009/3/29 Rob Hamerling <[email protected]>: > > I have 2 changes in mind: combine the 2 interrupt procedures to one > (there is already a interrupt-type test in each, so it is easy to > combine, and the code will be somehat more efficient). And secondly add > save/restore of FSR, even though the chance on corruption may be > minimal. The C-compiler I used (cc5x) has a nice feature: it doesn't > automatically save FSR, but produces a warning when FSR is used in the > interrupt routine. I think we need to know wether this is required, since this is a potential issue with all isr-based programs and very dificult to trace. And acutally, it seems logical the compiler handles this. It is not the user that needs the fsr, it is the compiler. The compiler also takes care of vars of procedures that are used in both level0 and isr.
Joep --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jallib" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
