From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Subject: Re: Protected Objects and Interrupt Handlers
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 16:02:09 +0000
Date: 2016-02-25T16:02:09+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <lysi0glqwu.fsf@pushface.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 2922ffdd-9678-4502-9bcb-8b199af91543@googlegroups.com
Maciej Sobczak <see.my.homepage@gmail.com> writes:
> Last but no least - Simon has pointed you towards an article (a book
> chapter, in fact) where the interrupts are handled by regular
> procedures instead - as an author of that text I feel responsible for
> clarifying why - the reason is that the book consistently assumes a
> zero-runtime execution platform, where the necessary scaffolding for
> protected objects (namely: actual synchronization) simply does not
> exist.
A minor point: a common cited advantage of the Cortex series is that
ISRs can be written in ordinary code, without compiler magic. This seems
to imply that other MCUs _do_ need compiler magic!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-25 16:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-23 22:25 Protected Objects and Interrupt Handlers Jere
2016-02-23 23:09 ` Simon Wright
2016-02-24 14:38 ` Jere
2016-02-24 18:29 ` Simon Wright
2016-02-24 21:37 ` Jere
2016-02-25 15:14 ` Maciej Sobczak
2016-02-25 15:59 ` Simon Wright
2016-02-26 3:20 ` Dennis Lee Bieber
2016-02-26 8:12 ` Simon Wright
2016-02-27 18:06 ` Maciej Sobczak
2016-02-25 16:02 ` Simon Wright [this message]
2016-02-25 17:40 ` Tero Koskinen
2016-02-25 19:49 ` Simon Wright
2016-03-13 8:10 ` Simon Wright
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox