[ECOS] AT91 bad IRQ/FIQ priority handling?
Tue Sep 14 16:38:00 GMT 2004
I did the check: all at91 targets have an AIC line 0 dedicated to FIQ (in
these platforms FIQ is an external interrupt ).
Then I think we don't need a CDL entry, a constant should be enough, but I
don't know the appropriate header where to put a constant like
CYGNUM_HAL_INTERRUPT_FIQ 0 for all at91 targets.
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 05:00:57PM +0200, Andrea Michelotti wrote:
> > The code I added is related only to the FIQ interrupt source generally
> > linked to the line 0 of the AIC (atmel Advanced Interrupt Controller) .
> > In fact if the FIQ line is linked to another line (possible, but, as far
> > I know, in atmel AIC fiq line is for default to 0) this code is not
> > but should be modified introducing a constant that identify the FIQ
> > Does hal_platform_ints.h have a macro to identify FIQ interrupt sources?
> > If not, I propose to add one to handle this kind of situations in at91
> > targets.
> > what do you think?
> That sounds like a better solution. But since this is in the hal
> varient directory you need to check if this is correct for all
> platforms that use the varient, ie eb40, eb40a, eb52 and eb55. If this
> is not generally true you will need to add some CDL so that this
> feature is only enabled on platforms that support it.
> Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
> and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss
More information about the Ecos-discuss