public inbox for ecos-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org To: ecos-bugs@ecos.sourceware.org Subject: [Bug 1001572] Separate FIQ and IRQ management Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:53:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20120424095341.792832F78008@mail.ecoscentric.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-1001572-13@http.bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/> Please do not reply to this email. Use the web interface provided at: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1001572 --- Comment #3 from Nick Garnett <nickg@ecoscentric.com> 2012-04-24 10:53:38 BST --- (In reply to comment #2) > I notice that FUNC_START_ARM does not put the new functions in a different > section, so they won't be GC'd, so will be in all programs, whether used or > not. It looks like I was going to do something about this in the eCosCentric > sources, but then it seems I commented it out (changeset 371380826e8c). Hmm, > can't remember why now. That is true of a number of asm utility routines. Something for a different checkin to deal with. > Thanks for incorporating the fix from bug 1001160. Frankly, I had forgotten that was the source of that particular change. > But that bug also mentions a third possibility, that it might be useful for > some users to do their own FIQ handling (and not use the FIQ->IRQ kludge), but > for FIQs to still be disabled when handling IRQs. This can have benefits for > some people. In particular, you would no longer need a separate FIQ interrupt > stack, but could share one with IRQ again, which could be an important memory > saver. > > I think all it would need is one more CDL option controlling the CPSR_INTR_MASK > define, which CYGOPT_HAL_ARM_FIQ_DISABLE can use 'requires' on to set. And also > then that lets us avoid defining __fiq_stack in that case. Thoughts? I'm not convinced. It seems to be a rather nasty subversion of the way in which the architecture is intended to work. I suspect that the IRQ entry code would need to be rejigged a little to ensure there are no races. For now I think we want to check this in as it stands. If there is any demand for what you suggest above then it can be added at a later date. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-24 9:53 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2012-04-23 16:22 [Bug 1001572] New: " bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-23 16:30 ` [Bug 1001572] " bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-23 19:39 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-24 9:53 ` bugzilla-daemon [this message] 2012-05-11 10:36 ` bugzilla-daemon -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2012-04-23 16:22 [Bug 1001572] New: " bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-23 16:30 ` [Bug 1001572] " bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-23 19:38 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-04-24 9:54 ` bugzilla-daemon 2012-05-11 10:36 ` bugzilla-daemon
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20120424095341.792832F78008@mail.ecoscentric.com \ --to=bugzilla-daemon@bugs.ecos.sourceware.org \ --cc=ecos-bugs@ecos.sourceware.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).