Matthias Trute writes:
> Hi,
>
>> I like these "critical[" "]critical" words, much better than int_suspend
>> and int_restore, but I prefer their current asm code implementation
>> since one would like to keep the criticial code execution to the
>> minimum.
>
> A critical section frame is not par
Hi,
> I like these "critical[" "]critical" words, much better than int_suspend
> and int_restore, but I prefer their current asm code implementation
> since one would like to keep the criticial code execution to the
> minimum.
A critical section frame is not particular speed sensitve.
It simply t
Matthias Trute writes:
> Hi,
>
>> "-int" (int-off.asm) counterpart is "int_restore" (int-restore.asm). So,
>> why is this "int_restore" header commented out, i.e., not available to
>> the high level?
>
> uhm. yes. These words are one of very first ones, that fell out of
> scope later on.
>
>
>> C
Hi,
> "-int" (int-off.asm) counterpart is "int_restore" (int-restore.asm). So,
> why is this "int_restore" header commented out, i.e., not available to
> the high level?
uhm. yes. These words are one of very first ones, that fell out of
scope later on.
> Candidly, as "+int" (int-on.asm) is a si
Enoch writes:
> Hello Matthias and all,
>
> "-int" (int-off.asm) counterpart is "int_restore" (int-restore.asm). So,
> why is this "int_restore" header commented out, i.e., not available to
> the high level?
>
> Candidly, as "+int" (int-on.asm) is a simple SEI instruction (Set Global
> Interrupt
