Add new user_irq claim APIs to make it easier for independent code using them to interoperate #854

2022-06-06T13:28:52-05:00

kilograham commented

2022-06-06 13:28:52 -05:00

(Migrated from github.com)

No description provided.

lurch (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2022-06-06 13:35:16 -05:00

src/rp2_common/hardware_irq/include/hardware/irq.h

					
				@ -289,6 +289,69 @@ void irq_set_pending(uint num);

				 * \note This is an internal method and user should generally not call it.

Does "entirely core local" mean that each core has it's own independent set of User IRQs? Might be worth being slightly more verbose? 🤷

Does "entirely core local" mean that each core has it's own independent set of User IRQs? Might be worth being slightly more verbose? :shrug:

lurch (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2022-06-06 13:41:50 -05:00

src/rp2_common/hardware_irq/irq.c

					
				@ -410,3 +413,31 @@ void irq_init_priorities() {

				    }

~~Is it worth reusing get_user_irq_claim_index here?~~
EDIT: Ah no, my mistake, I think what you're doing here is the inverse of get_user_irq_claim_index, it's just that the maths is the same for both 😉 (5 - 1 = 4 and 5 - 4 = 1)

(also, weird spacing here, with double space after = and no space between - and 1)

~~Is it worth reusing `get_user_irq_claim_index` here?~~ EDIT: Ah no, my mistake, I think what you're doing here is the _inverse_ of `get_user_irq_claim_index`, it's just that the maths is the same for both :wink: (`5 - 1 = 4` and `5 - 4 = 1`) (also, weird spacing here, with double space after `=` and no space between `-` and `1`)

lurch (Migrated from github.com) reviewed

2022-06-06 14:02:14 -05:00

src/rp2_common/pico_stdio_usb/include/pico/stdio_usb.h

					
				@ -39,9 +39,9 @@

				#define PICO_STDIO_USB_TASK_INTERVAL_US 1000

I wonder if it's worth removing the PICO_CONFIG line, given that we now don't expect people to provide an explicit PICO_STDIO_USB_LOW_PRIORITY_IRQ? 🤔

I wonder if it's worth removing the PICO_CONFIG line, given that we now don't _expect_ people to provide an explicit `PICO_STDIO_USB_LOW_PRIORITY_IRQ`? :thinking:

				`@ -289,6 +289,69 @@ void irq_set_pending(uint num);`
				`* \note This is an internal method and user should generally not call it.`

				`@ -39,9 +39,9 @@`
				`#define PICO_STDIO_USB_TASK_INTERVAL_US 1000`

Rows
Columns