* Re: Interrupt handler attribute for m68k
@ 1998-12-15 14:28 Mike Stump
1998-12-15 14:31 ` Jeffrey A Law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Mike Stump @ 1998-12-15 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jab3, law; +Cc: egcs
> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:57:06 -0700
> From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
> "__interrupt_handler__" was mandated by external forces :(
I would mandate people use
#define __interrupt__ __interrupt_handler__
if they want this, I think egcs should be consistent and less subject
to `bad' decisions. I think we should be willing to accept a fix for
this.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Interrupt handler attribute for m68k
1998-12-15 14:28 Interrupt handler attribute for m68k Mike Stump
@ 1998-12-15 14:31 ` Jeffrey A Law
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-12-15 14:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Stump; +Cc: jab3, egcs
In message < 199812152228.OAA06506@kankakee.wrs.com >you write:
> > Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 14:57:06 -0700
> > From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
>
> > "__interrupt_handler__" was mandated by external forces :(
>
> I would mandate people use
>
> #define __interrupt__ __interrupt_handler__
>
> if they want this, I think egcs should be consistent and less subject
> to `bad' decisions. I think we should be willing to accept a fix for
> this.
I don't see the need.
This is a *MACHINE DEPENDENT* attribute.
I'll happily accept "__interrupt__" as a synonym, but I don't see the need
to be so rigid as to force folks to change code because we want all the
machine dependent attributes to look the same.
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Interrupt handler attribute for m68k
@ 1998-12-16 10:16 John Breen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: John Breen @ 1998-12-16 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: egcs
From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
> > [...] Which one would be the best to use as a model?
>Not sure. Probably whichever port has code which most closely
>matches the m68k's prologue/epilogue code.
Maybe I'm being naive about this. From what I've been told, people
currently use a wrapper like this for interrupts on m68k:
movem.l %d0-%d1/%a0-%a1,-(%sp)
jsr c_function
movem.l (%sp)+,%d0-%d1/%a0-%a1
rte
My plan was simply to have the prologue code save these registers also
if it's an interrupt handler, and the epilogue restore them and do an
rte instead of an rts. The rest of the prologue/epilogue code would
stay the same.
If it takes much more than that, then I'm probably in over my head.
--
John A. Breen
jab3@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Interrupt handler attribute for m68k
@ 1998-12-15 13:43 John Breen
1998-12-15 13:58 ` Jeffrey A Law
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: John Breen @ 1998-12-15 13:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: egcs
I was thinking of trying my hand at implementing an attribute for
specifying interrupt handlers for the m68k. I see that it's been done
for a handful of processors, but they all seem to do things a little
differently. Which one would be the best to use as a model?
The first question that occurs to me is what should the attribute be
called? Most seem to use __interrupt__, although one appeared to use
__interrupt_handler__. Then again, Motorola (at least) uses the more
general term "exception", although I'll be happy to stick with
__interrupt__ if it will minimize confusion.
Also, if anyone else is currently working on this (or started but put it
on the shelf), let me know.
--
John A. Breen
jab3@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Interrupt handler attribute for m68k
1998-12-15 13:43 John Breen
@ 1998-12-15 13:58 ` Jeffrey A Law
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeffrey A Law @ 1998-12-15 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Breen; +Cc: egcs
In message < 19981215214326.22090.qmail@hotmail.com >you write:
> I was thinking of trying my hand at implementing an attribute for
> specifying interrupt handlers for the m68k. I see that it's been done
> for a handful of processors, but they all seem to do things a little
> differently. Which one would be the best to use as a model?
Not sure. Probably whichever port has code which most closely matches the
m68k's prologue/epilogue code.
> The first question that occurs to me is what should the attribute be
> called? Most seem to use __interrupt__, although one appeared to use
> __interrupt_handler__. Then again, Motorola (at least) uses the more
> general term "exception", although I'll be happy to stick with
> __interrupt__ if it will minimize confusion.
Use "__interrupt__".
"__interrupt_handler__" was mandated by external forces :(
jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1998-12-16 10:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1998-12-15 14:28 Interrupt handler attribute for m68k Mike Stump
1998-12-15 14:31 ` Jeffrey A Law
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1998-12-16 10:16 John Breen
1998-12-15 13:43 John Breen
1998-12-15 13:58 ` Jeffrey A Law
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).