set_vector() on SPARC

[Sebastian Huber]

On 16/10/2020 19:48, Joel Sherrill wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 11:40 PM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org 
> <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 16/10/20 3:30 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>     > On 16/10/2020 03:09, Chris Johns wrote:
>     >> On 16/10/20 4:57 am, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>     >>> I suggest to remove this function and replace it with
>     rtems_interrupt_catch()
>     >>> and add the interrupt enable to rtems_interrupt_catch().
>     >> Which BSPs will this effect?
>     >
>     > All SPARC BSPs.
>
>     OK.
>
>
> Unless you make that all BSPs which have set_vector, I am not in favor 
> of this.
>
> set_vector() was intended many many years ago as a central place for a 
> BSP
> to touch an interrupt mask register if it had one. This was sometimes 
> present
> on architectures which we now call simple vectored. This was universally
> present across all simple vectored architectures.
>
> If you want to eliminate it, do so. Don't leave it partially present.
My intention was to change this only on SPARC. The other architectures 
that use set_vector() are not really maintained.
>
>
>     >> What testing on real hardware will there be?
>     >
>     > I will test on GR712RC and GR740. I hope Gaisler tests the RTEMS
>     master from
>     > time to time on their hardware.
>
>     Yes. Testing as we are working on changes is much more helpful
>     than finding out
>     long after the focus has shifted.
>
>
> +1
Testing this change on everything except SPARC would be difficult.