Testing the interrupt extension API?

Sebastian Huber sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
Fri Oct 11 05:55:29 UTC 2019

On 10/10/2019 01:25, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>>> Interrupts with cap.can_raise set and cap.has_peripheral cleared can be
>>>> safely software controlled and used for tests.
>>> Why not just have an "is_software_triggered"?
>> As a replacement for has_peripheral?
> yes, it seems that if an interrupt is software triggered, then it
> cannot have a peripheral. I don't know if the opposite is true though,
> I guess there can be interrupt lines that are not software triggered,
> but don't have a peripheral attached to them, but then they are not
> active lines they can't actually raise an interrupt.  I don't know if
> that makes any sense.

On some controllers you can trigger every interrupt vector by software. 
On some you you can only trigger a subset. On some systems, some 
interrupt vectors are not available and cannot be triggered at all, e.g. 
chip variant A supports hardware modules M0, M1, and M2, variant B 
supports only M0, so the vectors used by M1 and M2 are not used (disabled).

Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.

More information about the devel mailing list