From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 21:20:08 -0600 From: Dennis Lee Bieber Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Protected Objects and Interrupt Handlers Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 22:20:21 -0500 Organization: IISS Elusive Unicorn Message-ID: References: <7663896a-a15e-47fd-8c7e-54a1c20d8d0f@googlegroups.com> <2922ffdd-9678-4502-9bcb-8b199af91543@googlegroups.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186 X-No-Archive: YES MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.79.219.20 X-Trace: sv3-bAF/ra4ac5pEUIYdoretZQ5MUStfbGcX3Hk7qeTlzovZtYnjqatMNgrAFfVKqtGIgfbGdEH0XguzLjh!fHC/pUC4vJ5wYdpHE3DHZ2IwNf77Vf/6aB80OVPbe9/9prSvkZm3QyGH7rktVkdYYt2/jkgyzK9q!P+wbMbAfhwer9s+8dMOvkm7P+wE= X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 2116 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:29613 Date: 2016-02-25T22:20:21-05:00 List-Id: On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:59:46 +0000, Simon Wright declaimed the following: >Maciej Sobczak writes: > >> Note also that it is easy to combine these two approaches - just let >> the interrupt handler (a procedure) interact with a dedicated >> protected object (by forwarding to its procedures) as if it was a >> regular work-item producing task - which, conceptually, it really is. > >I think this approach might have problems; if the PO doesn't expect to >be called in an interrupt context, it may do things (like block) which >an ISR should never do. > As I recall, Ada protected objects are not supposed to contain anything that could block. http://www.iuma.ulpgc.es/users/jmiranda/gnat-rts/node25.htm#SECTION00814000000000000000 -- Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN wlfraed@ix.netcom.com HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/